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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
In this issue: Authorisation, approval and supervision Prudential requirements Risk management and controls Financial crime and sanctions Dispute resolution for financial services lawyers Sustainable finance and ESG Banks and mutuals Consumer credit, mortgage and home finance Regulation of insurance Payment services and systems Fintech and cryptoassets Lex Talk®Financial Services: a Lexis®Nexis community Financial Services Enforcement Database Daily and weekly news alerts Intraday news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Authorisation, approval and supervision ESMA publishes updated registration guide for expanded supervisory mandate The European Securities and Markets Authority ( ESMA) has issued a refreshed guide now setting out registration obligations across a widening supervisory remit. Published 14 August 2025, it explains registering as a credit rating agency, trade repository, benchmark administrator, data reporting services provider, external reviewer under the EU Green Bond Regulation ( EU) 2023/2631, and an environment, social and governance ( ESG) rating provider under the ESG Rating Regulation ( EU) 2024/3005. ESMA will accept benchmark...
The failure to prevent fraud offence Introduced by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 ( ECCTA 2023) as part of wider efforts to combat financial crime, the failure to prevent fraud offence takes effect on 1 September 2025 and is intended to drive a meaningful, positive shift in corporate culture. This is the latest in the suite of corporate “failure to prevent” offences, following the failure to prevent bribery under the Bribery Act 2010 ( BA 2010) and the failure to prevent the facilitation of tax evasion in the Criminal Finances Act 2017. The offence is contained in ECCTA 2023, ss 199–206. Its purpose is to ensure large organisations are accountable for fraud carried out by employees, agents, subsidiaries, or others who provide services for or on behalf of the organisation, where the conduct was intended to benefit the...
District Judge Louisa Ciecióra At Westminster magistrates’ court in London, District Judge Louisa Ciecióra handed Aozma Sultana, 42, a ten-week jail term, suspended for a year. Sultana breached counter-terrorism rules by failing to supply information to the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation ( OFSI). After a trial in July 2025, she was found guilty of one count of refusing or failing to comply with a request for information under the Counter- Terrorism ( Sanctions) ( EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/577, reg 23. The charity head, Judge Ciecióra concluded, had not put forward ‘evidence of reasonable excuse’ for missing the June 2024 deadline. The judge described the conduct as deliberate and, consistent with her findings at trial, observed that Sultana was asked for the material multiple times and repeatedly did not provide it......
In this issue: Authorisation, approval and supervision Prudential requirements Risk management and controls Financial crime and sanctions Complaints, compensation and claims management Investigations, enforcement and discipline Regulation of capital markets Regulation of derivatives Banks and mutuals Consumer credit, mortgage and home finance Payment services and systems International—financial services and related sectors Fintech and cryptoassets Lex Talk®Financial Services: a Lexis®Nexis community Financial Services Enforcement Database Daily and weekly news alerts Intraday news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Authorisation, approval and supervision HM Treasury issues a policy statement describing its intended approach to the regulation of Appointed Representatives within UK financial services. The paper suggests targeted adjustments to enhance oversight and bolster consumer protection, while preserving the regime’s function in...
Hopcraft and another ( Respondents) v Close Brothers Ltd ( Appellant); Johnson ( Respondent) v First Rand Bank Ltd ( London Branch) t/a Moto Novo Finance ( Appellant); Wrench ( Respondent) v First Rand Bank Ltd ( London Branch) t/a Moto Novo Finance ( Appellant) [2025] UKSC 33 What are the practical implications of this case? The Supreme Court set aside the Court of Appeal’s ruling which had, by holding that motor retailers who arranged finance owed fiduciary obligations to their customers, significantly jolted the motor finance market and carried broader consequences for seller-led credit broking in other sectors and contexts within commerce, and for analogous brokerage arrangements. It likewise rejected both the Court of Appeal’s positions, and conclusions, in Wood v Commercial First Business Ltd [2022] Ch 123, namely that bribery is made out where the payee had a part in the...
What is the background to this consultation? OFSI, a unit within HM Treasury, is tasked with making sure the UK’s financial sanctions are understood, put into practice, and enforced. On 22 July 2025 it launched a consultation seeking views on proposed adjustments to the civil enforcement process for financial sanctions. These proposals follow mounting criticism of how the UK enforces sanctions. Spotlight on Corruption’s report last year, All Bark and No Bite, contended that weak enforcement undermines the UK’s efforts against economic crime. Moreover, at a Commons Foreign Affairs Committee session in November last year, Giles Thompson, OFSI’s head, accepted the need for more robust enforcement. The consultation paper itself notes that the impetus includes recognition that OFSI could make enforcement processes clearer and more transparent, and make resolving enforcement cases quicker and easier. That backdrop informs the current...
Elsewhere, the UK Supreme Court granted administrators fresh powers to recover proceeds from fraud. In a separate ruling, the court limited the remit and reach of the US Department of Justice ( DOJ). Here, Law360 unpacks the biggest corporate crime and civil fraud cases of the past year in detail. UK Supreme Court overturns traders' rate-rigging convictions In July 2025, the UK Supreme Court set aside the criminal convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, years after the traders were found guilty of conspiring to manipulate the benchmark interest rates Libor and Euribor. The justices unanimously quashed the former City traders’ convictions after deciding that serious procedural errors by the presiding judges in their trials years earlier had rendered the verdicts unsafe. The landmark ruling follows high-profile legal challenges over several years in which the men argued they were scapegoated amid public anger over banker...
Companies should take from the FCA’s action that compliance teams need to be empowered to challenge senior leaders and top earners, even when that risks ruffling feathers, according to legal specialists. The FCA’s provisional £5.9m sanction and industry ban imposed on the former fund manager on 5 August 2025 is weighty enough to prompt firms to reassess how much latitude they grant revenue generators. The regulator also issued a £40m penalty to Woodford Investment Management, Woodford’s firm. Both outcomes are provisional, awaiting a final determination by the Upper Tribunal, to which they have referred the FCA’s decision. Restraining star earners “ The key message for firms across the sector is that a superstar culture cannot be permitted to override compliance frameworks designed to protect consumers,” said Karl Foster, a partner at Spencer West LLP. “ FCA principles bind the fund manager at all times, and simply...
The judgment ( R v Hayes; R v Palombo [2025] UKSC 29) offers robust observations censuring the handling of the original trials and highlights worries about deficiencies within the criminal appeal system in England and Wales... Background Hayes and Palombo were found guilty in 2015 and 2019, respectively, of conspiracy to defraud arising from allegations concerning the manipulation of Libor and Euribor. Collectively, they received sentences totalling 15 years. Hayes remained on licence serving his 11-year term until the Supreme Court ruling set it aside. Seven further individuals continue to hold convictions for Libor and Euribor manipulation in the UK, which remains the sole jurisdiction where criminal findings for this behaviour still persist... Calculation of Libor Libor and Euribor functioned as benchmarks for short‑term interest rates, commonly referenced for commercial loan pricing and for determining values of numerous derivative instruments. Libor was derived from daily rate...
UK developments FCA issues full-page update on climate change and sustainable finance The Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA) has issued a full-page refresh of its ‘ Climate change and sustainable finance’ webpage, setting out its ongoing work in this area. The update draws together recent developments in the FCA’s regulatory stance, designed to support the management of risks linked to the shift to a more sustainable economy and to the impacts of climate change. It also details action to improve the availability and reliability of sustainability information, encourage fair competition, and contribute to internationally aligned standards. This sits within wider efforts to back the UK Government’s goal of making the UK a global centre for sustainable finance. Refer to LNB News 22/07/2025 51. Source: Climate change and sustainable finance [ Update]. FCA publishes multi-firm review findings on climate-related disclosures by asset managers, life insurers and...
A rift is opening across the UK financial services sector over the fate of digital money. At the centre of the split are comments by Andrew Bailey, governor of the Bank of England, who has again dampened expectations that stablecoins could stand in for bank-issued money. Incumbent finance has cheered; the fintech world is notably less enthused. Bailey, who also chairs the Financial Stability Board, is helping to shape the UK’s regulatory stance on stablecoins—cryptoassets tied to the likes of the dollar or sterling and typically issued by private companies. In several recent addresses, he signalled a preference for banks to tokenise existing deposits via distributed ledger technology rather than adopt stablecoins. He has also grown more cautious about the Bank of England’s own digital pound initiative. ‘ I would much rather [banks] go down the “tokenised deposits” street and say, “how do we...
The US Department of Justice has signalled notable shifts in corporate enforcement priorities. A six‑month pause in Foreign Corrupt Practices Act activity culminated in fresh guidance for prosecutors, while updates to existing DOJ policies have expanded rewards for voluntary self-reporting and strengthened incentives for whistleblowers. In parallel, overseas enforcement is evolving: recent guidance and legislation encourage disclosure and afford defences where robust compliance programmes are in place. At the same time, certain foreign authorities continue to champion cross‑border co-operation, a longstanding hallmark of assertive enforcers in an anti‑corruption arena historically led by the United States. Collectively, these movements recalibrate risks and incentives for global compliance programmes. Those charged with oversight should embed resilient reporting and investigation capabilities across all jurisdictions, balancing the DOJ’s new priorities with the more traditional focuses of foreign authorities. Crucially, the shifting landscape also offers concrete...
In this issue: Regulated activities Authorisation, approval and supervision Accountability, culture and social governance Prudential requirements Financial crime and sanctions Complaints, compensation and claims management Investigations, enforcement and discipline Dispute resolution for financial services lawyers Sustainable finance and ESG Banks and mutuals Consumer credit, mortgage and home finance Regulation of insurance Fintech and cryptoassets Lex Talk®Financial Services: a Lexis®Nexis community Financial Services Enforcement Database Daily and weekly news alerts Intraday news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Regulated activities FCA releases Handbook Notice No 132 The Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA) has issued Handbook Notice No 132, setting out amendments to the FCA Handbook approved by the FCA board on 26 June, 30 June, 10 July, 18 July and 31 July 2025. See: LNB News...
The City UK consultation response On 4 August 2025, The City UK noted that the FCA’s consultation on rules for issuing stablecoins—digital tokens typically linked to fiat currencies such as the dollar keeping values steady—contains a significant omission on granular AML obligations. The regulator’s plan for overseeing the sector failed to set this out. The trade association said in its 4 August 2025 consultation response: although the FCA’s crypto roadmap signals that financial crime requirements will be tackled in a later consultation, it is vital to spell out how AML standards will apply to digital assets, including use cases unique to stablecoins (and custody). Custody refers to holding and protecting a client’s digital assets, yet custodians, including crypto exchanges, may face exposure to financial crime from within organisations or via hackers or cyber-attacks. The City UK said the FCA needs to make clear how its...
Regulatory specialists caution that numerous financial firms are ill-equipped for the fallout of altered requirements for senior leaders—the FCA’s plan to extend how long criminal record checks remain valid before appointments could make it easier for wrongdoers to slip into boardroom ranks without timely scrutiny or deterrence measures. The ‘failure to prevent fraud’ offence in the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 ( ECCTA 2023) targets fraud by employees undertaken to advantage the business in practice. Under this provision, only the corporate entity faces prosecution directly. It covers financial services businesses satisfying any two of three thresholds: more than 250 staff; turnover above £36m; or assets exceeding £18m within the relevant accounting period for the organisation concerned. This simplification may expose regulated businesses to heightened infiltration by fraudsters and to follow-on liability under the ‘failure to prevent fraud’ offence where a fraud is carried out that...
Hopcraft and another v Close Brothers Limited; Johnson v First Rand Bank Limited ( London Branch) t/a Moto Novo Finance; Wrench v First Rand Bank Limited ( London Branch) t/a Moto Novo Finance [2025] UKSC 33 Background These three conjoined appeals addressed payments of commission by finance lenders to motor dealers for arranging hire purchase finance on cars, where that remuneration was not revealed, or only partly revealed, to the car hirers. In the usual scenario, a buyer attends a dealership, selects a vehicle, and agrees a price with the dealer. The dealer then secures a finance offer from a lender on hire purchase terms. Acting on the lender’s behalf, the dealer puts that offer to the customer. In every appeal, the dealer made profit on the vehicle sale and, significantly, also obtained a commission from the lender for introducing the business. Either the fact of...
In a statement issued on 26 July 2025, the German global insurer confirmed that cyber criminals had accessed personally identifiable information concerning the majority of Allianz Life’s customers, financial professionals, and select Allianz Life employees, after leveraging a social engineering tactic. Social engineering centres on manipulating people into actions that weaken their security, such as: transferring money revealing sensitive information The parent company of the North American business said it acted immediately following the 16 July 2025 breach to contain and mitigate the......
Britain’s highest court has granted the Foreign Office significant discretion by upholding sanctions on US- British billionaire Eugene Shvidler on 29 July 2025, a move that could pave the way for wider use of punitive financial measures. The justices’ view that officials should be ‘accorded a wide margin of appreciation’ in national security matters signals that courts will rarely unsettle sanctions listings, even when the underlying evidence appears unpersuasive. Syed Rahman, a partner at Rahman Ravelli, said the ruling will embolden ministers, while cautioning that there is an obvious danger the UK sanctions framework could become a tool of reputational penalty, lacking the checks and balances for which the legal system is known. Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the government has designated more than 1,800 individuals and entities. Yet this is the first judgment to address the lawfulness of...
In this issue: Regulators and bodies across the UK, EU and globally Licensing, clearance and oversight Accountability, culture and societal governance Prudential standards Risk oversight and controls Operational resilience Complaints, redress and claims handling Investigations, enforcement and disciplinary action Dispute resolution for financial services practitioners Insurance regulation Investigations, enforcement and disciplinary action Benchmark regulation and IBOR transition Operational resilience Financial crime and sanctions Sustainable finance and ESG Funds and asset management UK Mi FID II EU Mi FID II Capital markets regulation Payment services and systems Fintech and cryptoassets Lex Talk®Financial Services: a Lexis®Nexis community Financial Services Enforcement Database Daily and weekly news alerts Intraday news alerts New and updated content Dates for your...
According to a statement from the Prudential Regulation Authority ( PRA), Barents Reinsurance SA ( Barents) did not sufficiently plan for the regulatory consequences of the UK’s exit from the EU, the PRA said. The PRA added that Barents fell short in putting certain internal audit recommendations into practice. The regulator also found that, from July 2021 to October 2023, during this period, Barents lacked an appropriate, proportionate governance framework for its activities. Operating across multiple jurisdictions, Barents had moreover neglected to develop a governance plan reflecting its UK business. This was among a number of shortcomings that resulted in late regulatory......
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
