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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Jana Petruchová v FIBO Group Holdings Limited C-208/18 What are the practical implications of this case? The First Chamber has affirmed that the notion of 'consumer' in Articles 17–19 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), is broad enough to cover users of online trading platforms dealing with financial instruments. Such users, provided they are not acting in a professional role, may bring proceedings before their domestic courts, notwithstanding a contractual jurisdiction clause to the contrary. The Court of Justice’s decision not to narrow the concept of consumer means that even highly knowledgeable users or high-net-worth individuals are captured and may rely on the regime’s consumer safeguards, as long as they persuade the court they were not using the platform in the pursuit of their trade or profession. This applies regardless of wealth, trading expertise, or status. What was the...
Uber France SAS v Nabil Bensalem Case C–320/16 ECLI: EU: C:2018:221 What are the practical implications? This marked the second occasion on which the Court of Justice was invited to rule on the legal character of Uber’s offering under European law. The earlier reference, Asociación Profesional Élite Taxi v Uber Systems Spain SL, Case C‑434/15, went against Uber in December 2017, when the Court of Justice held that the service constituted transport and was therefore subject to Spanish national and local rules on transport. See Court of Justice declares that Uber is a transport service ( Asociación Profesional Élite Taxi v Uber Systems Spain, SL). The outcome in the present proceedings follows the Advocate General’s Opinion of 4 July 2017 and also confirms that Member States may, as a matter of criminal law, prohibit and penalise the unlawful provision of transport activities in...
Background e IDAS Regulation: Regulation ( EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive 1999/93/ EC What are the principal changes ushered in by the e IDAS Regulation? In what respects will the current regime be altered? Although signatures are commonly used on commercial paperwork, under English law a document generally need not be signed to have legal force, save for particular classes including: guarantees consumer credit agreements sales of real property, or wills When electronic formats such as fax and email emerged in the 1980s and 1990s, the courts in England adopted a notably liberal stance, treating even a telex answerback, generated without human action, as a valid signature. As a result, Directive 1999/93/ EC (the 1999 e Signature Directive), which came before the e IDAS...
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
