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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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: Public procurement Children's social care Education Licensing Social housing Local authority prosecutions Governance Local government finance Social care Environmental law and climate change Planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Public procurement CCS launches new procurement tools for electric vehicle infrastructure Crown Commercial Service ( CCS) has rolled out a toolkit to help local authorities navigate procurement for electric vehicle infrastructure ( EVI). Developed with the Department for Transport and other collaborators, the package includes configurable template documents for open-market procurement of on-street EVI services, together with draft terms and conditions. The materials are designed to reduce complexity, reflect government guidance and reinforce good practice. In addition, CCS has produced a distinct set of documents to cater for the upcoming Procurement Act 2023...
Higgs v Farmor’s School and (1) the Archbishops’ Council of the Church of England, (2) the Free Speech Union Ltd others as interveners), the Association of Christian Teachers, (4) Sex Matters, (5) the Equality and Human Rights Commission (as interveners), [2025] EWCA Civ 109 What are the practical implications of this judgment? This significant ruling addresses the difficult issue of where to set the boundary between lawful and unlawful disciplinary measures by an employer when an employee’s manifestation of belief is viewed as objectionable by others. It is expected to affect several appeals pending before the EAT, for example Randall v Trent College Ltd ( EA-2023-000298- LA) and University of Bristol v Miller ( EA-2024-000324- NU) (see Practice Note: Case tracker— Employment). Delivering the principal judgment, Underhill LJ provides a detailed account of the governing principles, encompassing the rights to freedom of thought and freedom of...
A non-citeable decision restating the law in relation to licensing appeals—de novo hearings, policies, and departure from policy ( Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council v West & Central Hertfordshire Magistrates’ Court and others) Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council v West & Central Hertfordshire Magistrates’ Court and others [2024] EWHC 3356 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? Alongside offering a clear digest of long-settled authorities on licensing appeals—which underpinned the High Court’s approach—the judgment also distils enduring jurisprudence on policies and when it is proper to deviate from them. More notable, however, are the indirect takeaways for both appellants and local authorities. The appellants did not... place before the licensing authority or the magistrates’ court evidence demonstrating the pandemic’s specific effect on each vehicle proprietor, material that could have supported a justified departure from policy. By way of example, a...
The Father ( Appellant) v Worcestershire County Council ( Respondent) [2025] UKSC 1 What are the practical implications of this case? Acting without legal representation, the father pursued his case to the Supreme Court, which entertained his submissions and examined the legal position that would have applied had the children been confined rather than living in foster care. The Court heard him in full and addressed the framework relevant to situations where children would, in fact, have been deprived of liberty rather than cared for by foster families. Its status as guidance will assist judges dealing with analogous cases in practice. The decision offers guidance for family courts facing comparable applications and, by extension, informs deprivation of liberty matters. On whether care orders issued by the High Court or the Family Court are susceptible to judicial review, the Supreme Court observed that an order of the High...
In this issue: Children's social care Public procurement Social housing Governance Education Social care Healthcare Environmental law and climate change Lex Talk®Local Government: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Children's social care Family court judges’ anonymisation reversed by Court of Appeal ( Tickle & Summers v BBC and others) Media coverage remains dominated by the killing of ten-year-old Sara Sharif by her father and step-mother. In its aftermath, reporters Louise Tickle and Hannah Summers, alongside leading news organisations, sought the release of documents and information from historic Children Act 1989 proceedings about Sara and her siblings, including the identities of the judges. Although none of those judges had applied for anonymity, Mr Justice Williams nevertheless inserted into his disclosure order a restriction preventing publication of their names. Appeals from...
Family court judges’ anonymisation overturned by the Court of Appeal ( Tickle & Summers v BBC and others) — Tickle & Summers v BBC and others [2025] EWCA Civ 42 What are the practical implications of this case? Save in only the narrowest of situations, judges sitting in the family court — including magistrates, district and circuit judges (para [54]) — should be identified by name, even where hearings are held in private. This development will be of particular note to practitioners who also sit as fee‑paid members of the judiciary. There is no distinct ‘shielded justice environment’ for family proceedings; the open justice principle applies across civil, criminal and family jurisdictions (para [45]). Although Ch A 1989, s 97 and section 12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 impose limits on what may and may not be reported, those statutory...
One Medicare (trading as One Primary Care LLP) v NHS Northamptonshire Integrated Care Board [2025] EWHC 63 ( TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling underscores the ongoing success of contracting bodies in securing the removal of the automatic suspension. It restates the criteria that steer the court when confronted with applications of this sort, stressing the role of adequacy of damages, but above all the balance of convenience. While the court accepted—though with some reluctance—that damages would not adequately compensate the claimant, the claimant was unable to surmount the substantial non-financial consequences the authority would face were the suspension to remain. As a result, the balance of convenience favoured the authority and the suspension was lifted. The judgment provides helpful guidance on applying these tests in public procurement disputes, particularly where vital services, including healthcare, are at stake. It also...
In this issue: Children's social care Public procurement Social housing Governance Social care Local government finance Education Healthcare Planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q& A Children's social care Supreme Court dismisses appeal upholding care order procedures ( The Father v Worcestershire CC) In The Father v Worcestershire County Council [2025] UKSC 1, the Supreme Court rejected the father’s challenge to the care order that placed his children with foster carers. He had applied for a writ of habeas corpus, asserting the order was made without jurisdiction and that the children were unlawfully deprived of their liberty. The Court of Appeal had already refused his bid, indicating that any objection to a care order must be pursued using the mechanisms in the Children Act 1989 and the Family...
Hussaini v Islington London Borough Council [2025] EWCA Civ 22 What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling carries particular weight for matters concerning homeless applicants under Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 ( HA 1996), where a local authority seeks to pass a case to another area on the footing that there is no local connection, and especially for those situations in which the applicant lives beyond the homelessness authority’s district and relies on ‘special circumstances’ within HA 1996, s 199(1)(d). Such special circumstances may exist, for instance, when an applicant accesses specialist health or support provision that is offered exclusively in a specific locality. The central question was how an authority should evaluate an applicant’s ‘need’ to reside within a particular borough, and the extent to which that consideration forms part of the local connection assessment. Did the law require an...
In this issue: Public procurement Children's social care Governance Social housing Social care Local government finance Healthcare Education Planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Public procurement Preparing for the Procurement Act 2023—new practical guidance On 24 February 2025, the principal provisions of the Procurement Act 2023 ( PA 2023) take effect. Any procurements starting on or after that date must follow PA 2023, while exercises launched under earlier public procurement legislation will continue to be run and managed under those provisions. For background reading, see Practice Notes: Public procurement reform and Introduction to the Procurement Act 2023— PA 2023. As the PA 2023 ‘go-live’ was deferred last year, government departments, public bodies and local authorities have been steadily preparing for the change, whilst still conducting their procurement activities under the existing rules. Under the transitional and saving provisions for PA 2023, both regimes will operate side by side, in parallel, for some time. See...
R (on the application of Hawes) v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council and Transport for London [2024] EWHC 3262 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? Low traffic neighbourhood schemes in London remain contentious, with communities and vehicle users in affected boroughs notably divided. Their primary objective is to reduce congestion and pollution, and they sit as a key policy of the MOL and Transport for London. This judgment demonstrates the limits of judicial review’s supervisory reach: where London boroughs undertake a proper consultation, they may lawfully exercise their powers to decide outcomes, including discontinuing existing schemes, even when Transport for London supports them. The case also underscores the complex interaction between local authority guidance—namely London Borough Mayors and the Mayor of London—statutory obligations, and competing community interests. In the context of urban traffic management, it confirms that decisions made by...
Jones v Wrexham County Borough Council and others [2024] EWCA Civ 1603 What is the legal background? Under section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 ( PCPA 2004), planning proposals are decided in line with the development plan unless other material factors suggest a different outcome. In Wales, the development plan covers the local development plan ( LDP) for the area, alongside the National Development Framework and any strategic development plan. In England, it comprises local development plan documents ( DPD) but excludes the National Planning Policy Framework. PCPA 2004, s 67 addresses how LDPs are adopted in Wales. It provides that a planning authority ‘may’ adopt an LDP if the examining inspector advises adoption, whether or not modifications are proposed. Comparable rules apply to adopting DPDs in England under PCPA 2004, s 20(7)–(7C). It was accepted before the Court of Appeal that...
Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council v Cheshire East Borough Council and others [2024] EWCA Civ 1565 What are the practical implications of this case? It was observed in the judgment that much of the appeal revisited issues already addressed. Nonetheless, fresh matters were examined at paras [48] and [49] and at paras [64]–[73], concerning the construction of ‘institution’ in section 105(6) of the Children Act 1989 ( Ch A 1989). Distinct from the appeal grounds, the court also set out helpful ‘points of general application’ drawn from earlier authorities on designation (para [46]). The court stopped short of a conclusive ruling on whether a hospital is an institution, but the clear inference was that it is not. That approach aligns with the observations of Lord Justice Thorpe in C ( A Child) v Plymouth County Council [2000] 1 FLR 875. Cobb J further recorded that Ch A...
In this issue: Social housing Public procurement Governance Education Children’s social care Healthcare Planning Local government finance Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Social housing Sanctions for landlords who fail to provide ECRs to contract holders in Wales ( Coastal Housing Group v Mitchell) The Divisional Court has determined that contract-holders in Wales do not owe rent unless, and until, their landlords supply them with a copy of the Electrical Condition Reports ( ECRs) for their properties. This marks the first reported ruling on how the Renting Homes ( Wales) Act 2016 ( RH( W) A 2016) should be read, following its commencement on 1 December 2022. The Act brought sweeping reforms to Welsh landlord and tenant law, fully displacing the framework originating in the Housing Acts 1985 and 1988. Among other...
R (on the application of Allen) v Secretary of State for Justice [2024] EWHC 2370 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? Allen is among only three rulings on the 2023 policy now in force—the ‘ Generic Parole Process Policy Framework 2023’ (‘ GPPPF’) at 5.83—and offers clear guidance on its proper application. The third, concluding factor, the ‘wholly persuasive case’ requirement, is approached as a proof-like threshold: at §54 the question posed is whether the case is ‘wholly persuasive’, as distinct from merely ‘moderately persuasive’. That determination rests with the Secretary of State for Justice and sits beyond the Parole Board’s remit. The suggested method is therefore: having addressed the first two criteria (whether adequate progress has been achieved and the risk of absconding), the Secretary of State should take a step back to judge if, taken as a whole, the matter...
What are the practical implications of this case? The challenge stumbled at the outset when the Court concluded the claimant had no standing. Section 31(3) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 stipulates that a claimant must show a ‘sufficient interest’. The Court therefore had to decide whether this membership body cleared that bar. The claimant was a registered company, with Mr Bains serving as its sole director. It was described as existing to supply guidance to its landlord members on landlord/tenant issues and licensing enquiries. Although, as individuals, those members would have been directly affected by the proposed licensing scheme, the proceedings were issued by the collective entity. ‘ Associational standing’ is engaged where an association seeks to sue on behalf of members who share a common interest in the matters raised in the claim and in the litigation overall......
In this issue: Public procurement Governance Social housing Education Children’s social care Social care Healthcare Planning Environmental law and climate change Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Public procurement Welsh Government introduces new Health Service Procurement Regulations for Wales The Welsh Government has presented the draft Health Services ( Provider Selection Regime) ( Wales) Regulations 2025 to Senedd Cymru. Replacing a withdrawn 2024 draft, this instrument sets up a new approach to procuring NHS health services in Wales under the Health Service Procurement ( Wales) Act 2024. It will apply to ‘relevant authorities’ as set out in the National Health Service ( Wales) Act 2006, and will switch off the UK Government’s Procurement Act 2023 for Welsh health service procurements. If approved by the Senedd, the measures will commence on 24...
Planning policy Revised National Planning Policy Framework published This review considers the principal planning developments from 2024. For a summary of the key planning cases in 2024, see: 2024 key cases round up for planning lawyers. On 12 December 2024, the government issued a refreshed National Planning Policy Framework ( NPPF), alongside its response to the July 2024 consultation on proposed NPPF changes. In an accompanying written ministerial statement, Matthew Pennycook, Minister of State for Housing and Planning, said the national policy updates are needed to free up land to deliver 1.5 million homes and the scale of infrastructure required to support growth. The release of the revised NPPF follows an eight-week consultation conducted from July to September 2024 on suggested revisions. Key measures adopted include overturning the December 2023 amendments made by the previous government, which had treated the standard method’s outcome as an...
This News Analysis provides a review of the standout cases from 2024 for planning lawyers. For a round-up of the major developments shaping planning law and practice during 2024, together with a forward glance at what is anticipated in 2025, see Key planning law developments—end of year review 2024 and what to expect in 2025. Environmental impact assessment Assessment of likely downstream effects In Finch v Surrey CC, the Supreme Court, by a 3:2 majority, held that the permission to retain and expand an established onshore oil well site, and to drill four additional hydrocarbon wells so that output could be taken from six wells in total, was unlawful because it failed to assess the ‘downstream’ GHG emissions that will inevitably arise when the refined fuel is burnt. That omission to consider downstream, or ‘ Scope 3’, emissions was found to contravene the Town and...
Hackney London Borough Council v Weintraub [2024] EWCA Civ 1561 What are the practical implications of this case? Lady Justice Asplin’s leading judgment offers a helpful overview of earlier case law in this sphere and ought to be considered by local authorities and legal practitioners. The decision turns on a point not previously explored in the authorities and, while noteworthy, is unlikely to have broad, everyday application. Even so, it gives greater weight to a tenant’s claim that they will return to the dwelling once the right to buy has completed, and makes clear that they may come back as an owner-occupier rather than as a tenant. Disputes concerning the tenancy condition more commonly focus on the risk of eviction than on preventing a right to buy from moving forward. The court concluded that a right to buy application may proceed if the tenant can...
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
