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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Payone Gmb H v Logo [2024] EWHC 981 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision draws attention to the considerations a court will assess when deciding if material mentioned at a hearing should be treated as being in the public domain and no longer protected by duties of confidence or related restraints. In this matter, the judge held that the documents had not become public and continued to attract confidentiality; however, the court underlined that the assessment is inherently one of fact and degree. The judgment further recorded that, if information has entered the public sphere, the court will not stand in the way of circulation, since doing so would lack any legitimate purpose. Parties engaged in litigation should therefore keep this ruling in view when selecting which documents and information to mention in, and place within the court...
In this issue: Key developments and materials Cybersecurity Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q& As Key developments and materials General election announced for 4 July 2024 Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has sought and obtained the King’s consent to dissolve Parliament and has scheduled a general election for 4 July 2024. Under the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022, Parliament will be prorogued on 24 May 2024 and dissolved on 30 May 2024. This assessment examines the consequences of the announcement for bills currently progressing through Parliament, as well as the implications for government and public bodies in the period leading up to the election......
The Solicitors Regulation Authority ( SRA) plans to refer a solicitor to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal ( SDT) in relation to a purportedly menacing SLAPP (shorthand for strategic lawsuit against public participation) aimed at silencing Dan Neidle. Neidle, once a partner at Clifford Chance LLP, set up Tax Policy Associates, a think tank. On 10 May 2024, the SRA confirmed its intention to refer a matter concerning an Osborne Clarke individual. The watchdog declined to provide more information or verify the partner’s identity. On his Tax Policy Associates website, Neidle published extensive material about his inquiry into Zahawi’s tax affairs. He outlined exchanges with Osborne Clarke partner, Ashley Hurst. Neidle released a letter from Hurst requesting that he withdraw assertions that the MP had been dishonest. The correspondence was marked confidential and ‘without prejudice’, and warned it would be a ‘serious matter’ if he...
In this issue: Data protection Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Data protection Open AI subject to an EU GDPR infringement complaint on Chat GPT MLex: Open AI, the firm behind the generative AI chatbot Chat GPT, is breaching EU data protection rules by generating incorrect personal data about individuals, according to a new complaint from Austrian campaign group Noyb. The organisation announced today that it has filed a complaint with the Austrian data protection authority and is also demanding a fine be imposed on Open AI. See News Analysis: Open AI subject to a GDPR infringement complaint on Chat GPT......
Background In March 2024, the Information Commissioner’s Office ( ICO) issued new guidance (the Guidance) explaining how it will determine penalty notices and set fines under the UK General Data Protection Regulation, the assimilated Regulation ( EU) 2016/679 ( UK GDPR), and the Data Protection Act 2018 ( DPA 2018) (collectively, the UK data protection laws). This Guidance replaces the penalty notice sections of the ICO Regulatory Action Policy from November 2018 and is far more detailed. It applies to all fresh cases concerning infringements of the UK data protection laws, and to ongoing matters where no notice of intent to impose a fine has yet been served... What are the key questions on which the Guidance provides greater clarity? The Guidance is divided into three sections: statutory background circumstances in which the ICO would consider a penalty notice...
Open AI faces a complaint alleging a breach of the General Data Protection Regulation ( GDPR) linked to its generative AI chatbot, Chat GPT, lodged by Austrian campaign group Noyb alongside an individual claimant. The data protection organisation, co-founded by data protection activist Max Schrems, asserts Open AI supplied inaccurate details concerning the personal data of a publicly known individual — in this instance, namely his date of birth......
In this issue: Data protection e Privacy Cybersecurity Reputation management Lex Talk®Information Law: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Data protection EU Parliament submits written evidence in Lords’ UK- EU data adequacy inquiry The European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( LIBE Committee) has provided written evidence to the House of Lords European Affairs Committee ( EAC) for its inquiry into data adequacy and what it means for the UK– EU relationship. The submission opens with observations on the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill ( DPDIB) currently before the UK Parliament, including commentary on the terms ‘singling out’ and ‘pseudonymised data’. The LIBE Committee then addresses the questions set by the Lords Committee. It also voices reservations about proposed changes to the role of the...
Various Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2024] EWHC 902 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This notable judgment examines when it is right to direct a trial of a preliminary issue before the main hearing. The court emphasised that limitation issues are often apt for early determination, and warned that if such questions are left to be decided only at the final trial, the policy basis of limitation law would be weakened. It also confirms that the governing approach to ordering a preliminary issue trial lies in the ten factors identified by Neuberger J in Steele v Steele [2001] CP Rep 106 (not reported by Lexis Nexis®UK). In brief, while limitation is frequently suitable for preliminary resolution, the court must still apply those factors when deciding whether a discrete issue should be tried first......
According to an EU assessment, two decisions from the bloc’s highest court indicating that national data protection authorities enjoy minimal leeway over the imposition of fines are set to be mirrored in other matters. A note dated 2 April, viewed by MLex and prepared by the Council of the EU, reviews two fresh Court of Justice judgments on how regulators should calculate GDPR fines......
Social media companies face two possible restrictions on the way they can process data for personalised ads if judges follow a legal opinion issued for the EU’s top court on 25 April 2024 A non-binding opinion by Advocate General Athanasios Rantos for the Court of Justice, in the dispute between Meta Platforms and Austrian privacy advocate Max Schrems, signals two curbs on how platforms handle data for personalised advertising. He indicated that EU privacy rules bar firms from processing such data indefinitely, and that the mere fact information is public does not automatically justify its use for targeting ads. Data minimisation under the EU GDPR means companies cannot run targeted advertising with open-ended scope, either in duration or in the breadth of data involved, ruling out processing ‘without restriction as to time or type of data’. The case also examines whether...
The non-binding view delivered by Szpunar, an Advocate General at the Court of Justice of the EU, examined whether the General Data Protection Regulation ( EU GDPR) can be interpreted as permitting a competitor to seek an injunction before the civil courts, mirroring what had been possible under the predecessor regime, the 1995 Data Protection Directive. He indicated on 25 April 2024 that an injunction claim brought by a business against a rival, relying on that rival’s breach of the GDPR’s provisions, may sit alongside the remedies set out in the GDPR. Selling medicine online The dispute stems from questions put to the EU court by German judges in a case between two pharmacists, in which one attempted to sue a competitor for unfair competition on the footing of GDPR violations, namely the handling of health data through online sales of...
In this issue: Data protection e Privacy Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Data protection EDBP publishes opinion on ‘consent or pay’ models used by large online platforms The European Data Protection Board ( EDPB) has issued an Opinion examining the validity of consent to process personal data for behavioural advertising where major online platforms deploy ‘consent or pay’ approaches. This Opinion follows a request under Article 64(2) of Regulation ( EU) 2016/679, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation ( EU GDPR), by the Dutch, Norwegian and Hamburg Data Protection Authorities ( DPAs). The EDPB considers it impossible for large online platforms to satisfy the criteria for valid consent if users are presented only with a choice between agreeing to processing for behavioural advertising and paying a fee. In devising alternatives, the EDPB says such platforms should provide an ‘equivalent alternative’ that does not involve paying a...
Austen Hays announced it has filed a claim in the High Court, asserting that Grindr violated data protection rules by unlawfully handling and disclosing users’ 'highly sensitive' medical information to third parties without permission. According to the firm, advertising partners including Localytics and Apptimize received private data from Grindr’s users between May 2018 and April 2020, and potentially for a longer period, the firm added in its claim. Founded in 2009, the app calls itself 'the largest social networking app for gay, bi, trans and queer people', claiming 'millions of daily users' who use its location-based technology to connect across more than 190 countries. Austen Hays said the breaches enabled a 'potentially unlimited number' of third parties to direct advertisements at users and tailor those promotions. These third parties either delivered adverts themselves or operated as so-called adtech intermediaries, with the potential to pass data on to...
In this issue: Data protection Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Data protection Data protection ICO unveils fresh guidance to bolster transparency across health and social care The Information Commissioner’s Office ( ICO) has issued fresh guidance to give regulatory clarity on how health and social care organisations should keep people informed. According to the ICO, this will help organisations understand what transparency means and properly judge appropriate levels of transparency. It also sets out practical steps for creating clear, effective transparency information......
In this issue Data protection Reputation management Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Updated Practice Notes Updated Precedents Data protection ICO signs cross-border data protection and privacy enforcement agreement The Information Commissioner’s Office ( ICO) has entered into a new international multilateral arrangement with the Global Cooperation Arrangement for Privacy Enforcement ( Global CAPE) to support cross-border data protection and privacy enforcement. Through this framework, the ICO may now help with investigations and exchange information with participating countries without needing separate memoranda of understanding. Global CAPE’s members include the United States, Australia, Canada, Mexico, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Philippines, Singapore and Chinese Taipei. The arrangement was developed to complement the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation Cross-border Privacy Rules ( APEC CBPR), which likewise promotes collaboration and assistance in privacy and data security...
In this issue: Data protection Confidential information Lex Talk® Information Law: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Data protection ICO sets out 2024–2025 Children’s Code strategy The Information Commissioner’s Office ( ICO) has outlined its 2024–2025 priorities to safeguard children’s privacy online. The refreshed Children’s Code strategy centres on default privacy settings and locking geolocation on children’s profiles, switching off targeted advertising, scrutinising how recommender systems rely on children’s search activity, and the handling of data concerning those under 13. The ICO also plans to strengthen co-operation with Ofcom and work more closely with international peers to lift data protection standards for children across the UK......
Justice Secretary, Alex Chalk, has said the move is intended to end the 'murky world of non-disclosure agreements' Under plans to curb misuse of NDAs, those bound by confidentiality clauses would still be free to raise alleged criminality with key professionals and crime-fighting bodies. On 28 March 2024, Alex Chalk set out an ambition to end the ‘murky world’ where such agreements are used to conceal wrongdoing, adding that the reforms will make clear in law that gagging orders cannot lawfully be wielded against victims to block justice or silence them. Lawyers and the police Medical practitioners and counsellors Advocates and other organisations that investigate crime The change will not bite immediately; legislation will be brought forward ‘when parliamentary time allows’, the Ministry of Justice said. The Mo J also confirmed the bill will not capture NDAs signed before it secures royal...
In this issue: Data protection Public sector information Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q& A Data protection An obligation to erase personal data without a data subject request—the Court of Justice’s interpretation of Article 58 of the EU GDPR (Újpest administration v NAIH) In Budapest Főváros IV Kerület Újpest Önkormányzat Polgármesteri Hivatala v Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság, the Court of Justice held that national supervisory authorities are empowered to require controllers to erase personal data processed unlawfully, even where no express request has been made by the data subject. The Court further clarified that, if processing is unlawful, a supervisory authority may instruct erasure whether the controller obtained the information directly from individuals or via third parties. The decision may have a material effect on future data-driven products and services:...
What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling bolsters the independence of national supervisory authorities in applying the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation ( Regulation ( EU) 2016/679), with a clear emphasis on safeguarding personal data effectively. By confirming their power to mandate deletion even without any prior request from data subjects, the Court of Justice signals that EU GDPR standards must be enforced rigorously, promoting stronger accountability and transparency in the digital sphere. The outcome may markedly affect businesses, which now face the prospect of losing processed datasets as well as incurring administrative fines for infringements. Data-driven offerings may even have to be withdrawn where the underlying datasets stem from unlawful processing and must therefore be erased. The possibility of personal data being removed is a material factor when evaluating the risk of EU GDPR...
Worldcoin, a crypto initiative backed by Open AI’s chief executive, Sam Altman, has been barred from gathering certain data in Portugal, only weeks after a comparable sanction in Spain. Portugal’s data protection authority said it had instructed the Worldcoin Foundation to implement, within 24 hours, a temporary restriction on the collection of biometric information. It must cease harvesting that category of data for 90 days while the regulator finalises its inquiry and delivers a definitive ruling, the Portuguese DPA said. The Worldcoin scheme lets individuals confirm they are human online by submitting to biometric capture via bespoke, orb-shaped iris scanners. In return for enrolling for a World ID, applicants are granted a one-off allocation of the cryptocurrency, also named Worldcoin. The urgent interim measure taken by the Portuguese DPA follows dozens of......
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
