Featured documents
R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
Most recent News
The prohibitions span manipulative practices; AI that takes advantage of people with disabilities; social scoring; some versions of predictive policing; facial-recognition repositories like Clearview AI; and biometric classification. They also extend to emotion-detection tools in schools and workplaces, and to real-time Remote Biometric Identification ( RBI) in places open to the public, save in narrowly defined situations. From February 2025, EU member states may introduce domestic rules governing these exceptional deployments of real-time RBI. However, until August 2025 there is no duty to appoint data protection regulators to supervise them. This gap is partly bridged because every law-enforcement use of real-time RBI must be reported to the relevant privacy authorities......
To conclude, although ISO 42001 calls for many measures akin to those set out by the AI Act, the latter tends to be narrower and more detailed. Following the ISO framework will often assist with meeting legal duties, including under the AI Act, and in some circumstances could even be sufficient; however, this may prompt competent authorities to judge that ISO compliance is not the same as AI Act compliance, even where obligations intersect. Overlapping requirements, different focus ISO 42001 and the AI Act diverge conceptually and in their respective legal character significantly: ISO 42001 is a voluntary standard centred on organisational AI management and governance, whereas the AI Act is a mandatory regulation directed at product safety and oversight. Even so, ISO 42001 offers a practical baseline for tackling AI compliance efforts. For illustration, the AI Act demands that high‑risk AI systems enable automatic event logging...
The Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court found that the lower court had gone beyond the relief sought when it prohibited Sibio Technology UK, a competitor to Abbott Diabetes Care, from selling its devices in Ireland, which had merely signalled a non-binding intention to join the bloc's patent system. Ireland was not a contracting member state and therefore could not be treated as covered by Abbott's request for a preliminary injunction, the appellate court said. Abbott's unit, which sells its Free Style Libre devices for people with diabetes, sought a preliminary injunction in all contracting member states where the patent in issue was in force, namely the Netherlands, Germany, France, Ireland and the UK, according to the judgment. The first court held that ......
These measures are marginally below the provisional levies the bloc previously applied to Chinese BEV imports in July 2024. Under the plan, the proposed tariffs will not be retroactive and the provisional charges will not be recovered at all. The anti-subsidy steps, forming part of the EU’s most far-reaching trade-defence inquiry, must be formally signed off by EU governments before taking effect at the end of October 2024. If adopted, every BEV built in China — including models from European and US marques — will be covered. The three Chinese exporters sampled for the EU review ( BYD, Geely and Saic) are set to receive individual rates of 17%, 19.3% and 36.3%, respectively, according to a proposal dated 20 August 2024 and seen by MLex. Firms that cooperated but were not in the sample will face a...
In this issue: Data protection and cybersecurity Financial services Insurance and reinsurance International trade Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers Data protection and cybersecurity Comment— Google's reversal on killing cookies may prompt EU ad sector proposals MLex reports that Google’s revised plan, giving people greater control over how online adverts are delivered, is expected to draw rigorous scrutiny from European Commission officials, as they contemplate potential legislative measures on web cookies and digital advertising in the coming months. See News Analysis: Comment— Google's reversal on killing cookies may prompt EU ad sector proposals. X suspends processing of personal data of EU and EEA users to train AI tool The Irish Data Protection Commission ( DPC) has reached an agreement with X, under which the platform will pause processing of personal data contained in the public posts of X’s users in the EU and the EEA, between 7 May and 1 August 2024, for the...
In July 2024, the dominant search and advertising firm announced it would roll out a user-choice cookie prompt in Chrome. People will be able either to retain third-party cookies—the adtech sector’s principal mechanism for targeted advertising—or select a ‘new experience’ intended to help them ‘make an informed choice that applies across their web browsing’. Four years after first saying it planned to scrap third-party cookies in the world’s dominant Internet browser, Google is now leaving it to consumers to decide whether advertisers can continue to reap the benefits of cross-site tracking for targeted ads. That change places fresh attention on the Commission, which has pressed for cookie choices in browser settings since putting forward the e- Privacy Regulation in 2017. The draft law has spent six years in legislative limbo. By confirming it will retain third-party cookies while expanding user options within Chrome, Google...
In this issue: Competition and state aid Financial services Environment Life sciences TMT Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers Competition and state aid Antitrust– Commission launches consultation on draft guidelines on exclusionary abuses The European Commission has begun a consultation on draft Guidelines addressing exclusionary abuses of dominance (the Draft Guidelines). See News Analysis: EU Competition law—daily round-up (01/08/2024). Financial services EIOPA publishes consultation on new proportionality regime under Solvency II The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority ( EIOPA) has commenced a consultation on the future implementation of the new proportionality framework under Solvency II. EIOPA invites stakeholders to submit feedback on the consultation paper and draft advice by 25 October 2024. See: LNB News 05/08/2024 24. Publication of implementing regulation laying down technical information for the calculation of technical provisions and basic own funds for...
In this issue: EU fundamentals Competition and state aid Data protection and cybersecurity Free movement, immigration and employment Financial services Environment IP Life sciences TMT Lex Talk®EU Law: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers EU fundamentals European Commission releases July 2024 infringement package The European Commission has unveiled the July 2024 infringement package, outlining the EU Member States it is pursuing for not meeting their obligations under EU law. This July 2024 package features letters of formal notice sent to Italy for incorrectly transposing Directive 2008/98/ EC (the Waste Framework Directive), and to Belgium, Spain, Croatia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Sweden for failing to comply with Regulation 2022 ( EU) 2022/2065, the EU Digital Services Act ( EU DSA), among other concerns. See: LNB News 25/07/2024 42......
On 14 June, the Council of the EU adopted its position on the proposal, representing a notable advance in the legislative process. The draft directive pursues a fundamental objective: to harmonise and modernise the current EU rules governing definitions and penalties for corruption offences. It adopts a comprehensive reach across both private and public spheres, would make the UN Convention against corruption binding within EU law, and in certain respects would exceed those standards. As an instrument of minimum harmonisation at EU level, it permits Member States to deviate from the common baseline where they choose to put in place stricter national rules. This article offers an overview and commentary on the most significant novelties introduced by the draft, as refined by the Council’s position, and concludes with an examination of the key practical implications for companies, outlining the anticipated next...
The European Commission has circulated a revised proposal for an EU Artificial Intelligence Liability Directive, intended to complement the new AI Act, to EU governments as well as lawmakers charged with examining it closely. The update, viewed by MLex, chiefly brings the AI Liability Directive into line with the AI Act’s final wording, the flagship statute passed earlier this year that sets out product-safety requirements for AI. However, fresh language could markedly widen the responsibility borne by those who deploy a risky AI application and bring it into actual operation. The aim of the AI Liability Directive is to standardise certain elements of court actions brought under national fault-based liability systems. Originally tabled by the commission in September 2022 (see here), the plan was paused while EU policymakers prioritised completing the AI Act......
The hearing stemmed from an infringement action lodged soon after the court’s launch on 1 June 2023. It took place on 16 May 2024, with judgment handed down on 3 July 2024. Encouragingly, the UPC has nearly achieved its ambition of delivering a final ruling within twelve months of commencement and within six weeks of the oral session. This timetable broadly reflects the UPC’s target of a decision within twelve months of commencement, and within six weeks after the oral hearing. The disputed patent was EP 3375337, owned by Franz Kaldewei Gmb H & Co KG, concerning a ‘ Bathtub Sanitation Device’. As claimant, Franz Kaldewei alleged that the defendant, Bette Gmb H & Co KG, infringed claims 1–3 across several contracting EU Member States where the patent remained in force— Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the...
The regime now applies to software The regime now covers software, laying the legal groundwork for compensation claims tied to faulty products that cause harms including bodily injury, psychological damage, and the destruction or corruption of data. This exposes software creators to a wave of class action litigation. At a fundamental level, uncertainty remains over whether data losses stemming from cyber incidents are intended to be compensable under the updated EU Product Liability Directive ( PLD), which speaks of ‘destruction or corruption of data not used for professional purposes’. Katie Chandler, a partner at Taylor Wessing, told MLex that replacing the word ‘loss’ with ‘destruction’ in an earlier PLD draft signals an intention not to include lost data in the setting of cyberattacks or data theft. In essence, EU legislators likely had in mind the obliteration of personal digital files on a laptop...
They concern EU government institutions, pursuant to EU Regulation 2018/1725. That Regulation sets the rules for safeguarding personal data within EU government institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, and empowers the supervisor as the institutions’ independent data protection authority. While these guidelines are limited to EU governmental entities, they shed light on how the supervisor may handle generative AI in the future. Given the recently adopted EU Artificial Intelligence Act, due to take effect over the coming years, and the accelerating global shift towards AI regulation, the guidelines hint at what might become the next stage of AI oversight in Europe, the UK, the US and elsewhere. For clarity, generative AI denotes advances in computer deep learning models built to deliver a broad and general spectrum of outputs, able to perform a variety of tasks and uses, such as producing text, images or audio. The most...
In this issue: EU fundamentals Commercial Competition and state aid Data protection and cybersecurity Dispute resolution Financial services Environment IP Life sciences TMT Regulatory International trade Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers EU fundamentals Ursula von der Leyen provides vision statement for Europe and wins re-election Ms Ursula von der Leyen secured a second term as President of the European Commission, winning 401 votes in her favour in the European Parliament. Ahead of the ballot, she outlined her vision for a Europe that is even stronger and more prosperous. Among her flagship proposals are: a new Clean Industrial Deal to accelerate decarbonisation and drive industrial expansion; a European Democracy Shield to confront foreign information manipulation and interference; an agriculture plan to support adaptation to climate change; a...
The Consumer Protection Cooperation ( CPC) Network (which enforces EU consumer protection laws) The Consumer Protection Cooperation ( CPC) Network has informed Meta that it is worried about the firm’s demand that consumers either agree to their personal data being used for personalised advertising or pay for a subscription. The action, led by France’s consumer authority and co-ordinated by the commission, argues that the pay-or-consent model introduced in the EU in November 2024 may mislead people by using the word ‘free’, while Meta asks them to accept that it can generate revenue by using their personal data to display personalised ads. The CPC network lodged its complaint alongside the European Commission’s ongoing examination of whether Meta’s pay-or-consent approach satisfies the obligations of the EU Digital Markets Act ( DMA). That law requires Meta to secure users’ consent when it plans to combine or use their...
What are the practical implications of this case? The key point is that, where UK rights underpin the dispute, appeals lie only against EUIPO Board of Appeal decisions dated on or before IP completion day (11.00 pm on 31 December 2020). It is still uncertain how the Board of Appeal will dispose of the matter now sent back for reconsideration, including whether it will be rejected on the simple basis that Indo European Foods’ earlier right no longer constitutes a valid ground of opposition in the EU. What was the background? Mr Chakari lodged an EUTM application on 14 June 2017 for a figurative sign, covering goods made from rice in Classes 30 and 31 (see image at para [15] of the judgment). On 13 October 2017, Indo European Foods submitted a notice of opposition relying on the earlier unregistered UK word mark BASMATI for rice,...
From Munich, the UPC’s office issued a decision that wiped out an Amgen patent across all 17 EU Member States, covering key patent venues including Germany, France, the Netherlands and Italy. The outcome represents a significant victory for Regeneron and Sanofi, which produce Praluent, a cholesterol therapy that competes with Repatha. According to the UPC, ‘ The patent as granted is invalid because it does not involve an inventive step’. Since 2014, the companies have been locked in a dispute with Amgen, which has maintained that the manufacture of Praluent infringes wording in multiple patents held by Amgen. In the US, the case appeared before a jury in a Delaware federal court, was subsequently overturned, and later proceeded to the highest court in the US in 2023, after many years of legal wrangling......
European Commission v United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Case C-516/22 ( ECLI- EU- C-2024-231) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment underscores the Court of Justice’s careful stance on arbitration as a parallel route for settling disputes touching on EU law. That outlook is deliberately cautious and firmly supervisory. To preserve the primacy of the EU legal system and consistent construction of EU rules across the internal market, the Court will see to it that executing intra‑ EU arbitral awards, including those issued under international instruments, such as the ICSID Convention, does not inflict irreversible harm on that framework. Consequently, the Court will take every measure to verify such awards’ conformity with EU law and, where that cannot be achieved, bar their enforcement within the EU to the extent that they conflict with EU law. In light of this,...
In this issue EU fundamentals Banking and Finance Competition and state aid Data protection and cybersecurity Financial services Energy Environment IP Life sciences TMT Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers EU fundamentals Council of the EU agrees its position on the 2025 EU draft budget The Council of the EU has settled on its stance for the 2025 draft budget, setting overall commitments at €191.53bn and payments at €146.21bn. It underscores the need for the budget to keep demonstrating the EU’s solidarity with Ukraine and to tackle associated crises. The Council argues the budget must be grounded in real needs, practise careful fiscal planning, and retain adequate headroom under the multiannual financial framework ( MFF) ceilings to manage unexpected events and confront the Union’s challenges, while still...
An automated contract might see a smart refrigerator reorder milk the moment supplies run dry, or a production line seek out a missing part without a person placing the order. Yet this emerging method of contracting is already stirring considerable debate among policymakers and legal scholars. Conventional contract law has long presumed that people alone took the decisions. Consequently, the EU executive is weighing a possible regulatory response. The initiative remains at a very nascent stage, with officials commissioning a study ‘on novel forms of contracting in the digital economy’ and collecting broad stakeholder views, MLex has learnt. According to a letter from the Commission inviting a stakeholder’s input, seen by MLex, ‘the study assesses how far existing legal frameworks can support business models that use AI in contracting, while delivering legal certainty for companies and protecting the rights of all...
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
