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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Lifestyle Equities CV and another company v Sportsdirect. Com Retail Ltd and other companies [2025] EWHC 1417 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Since the TMA 1994 arrived, advisers have urged clients to record trade mark licences, yet that advice is often ignored. This High Court ruling returns the point to centre stage, offering sharper guidance on elements of the registration regime. At its core sits judicial discretion across the framework. The court firmly held that a non‑exclusive licensee cannot sue for infringement without the proprietor’s consent; however, the licence need not be recorded for the licensee’s losses to be taken into account during a damages enquiry. Registering the licence belatedly, including after proceedings have begun, can also be acceptable. Nonetheless, whether and how the court credits such timing sits squarely within its discretion. The trade‑off for such...
In this issue: Social housing Children's social care Governance Public procurement Social care Local government finance Licensing Planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Social housing Rent repayment orders and ‘person managing’ ( Global 100 v Ross and others) Global 100 appealed to the Upper Tribunal ( Lands Chamber), challenging a First-tier Tribunal ( FTT) ruling which had allowed the respondent property guardian’s application for rent repayment orders ( RROs) under section 43 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 ( HPA 2016). The London Borough of Haringey had entered into a contract with GGM concerning a council-owned building to provide live-in property guardianship services. In turn, GGM authorised its related company, Global 100 ( G100), to issue licences to live-in guardians, a group that included the respondents to the appeal. No...
Global 100 Ltd v Ross and others [2025] UKUT 264 ( LC) What are the practical implications of this case? The practical effect of this ruling concerns the method by which the FTT identifies those 'persons managing' or 'in control' of a property within Property Guardianship arrangements and schemes, for the purpose of making Rent Repayment Orders arising from the specified criminal offences in legislation. In this context, the relevant breach was the failure to licence an HMO. In this matter, the FTT directed its attention to the exact character of the contractual arrangements: the relationship between the local authority that owned the premises, its agreement with GGM, and the detailed terms and provisions of that agreement. That scrutiny was undertaken to establish who, in reality, was receiving monies and fees from the live-in guardians, notwithstanding that GGM and G100 were linked...
Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, G (by his Children’s Guardian) and A Hospital Trust [2025] EWHC 1974 ( Fam) What are the practical implications of this case? The practical implications are: A clear reminder that the child’s age is critical. Here, the child was 17, so the local authority could not seek a care order or interim care order under section 31(3) of the Children Act 1989. Although an emergency protection order was theoretically available, its brief duration and limited relevance to these facts meant it was not the answer; the authority’s sole viable course was to ask the court for permission to invoke the inherent jurisdiction. Affirms that a local authority cannot rely on a deprivation of liberty order to force a looked-after child to accept its preferred accommodation or placement. While the court recognised that section 20(6) of the...
In this issue: Licensing Social housing Local government finance Governance Social Care Healthcare Planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Licensing Taxi licensing— A contract for hire of a Private Hire Vehicle ( PHV) is not a contract when it’s a booking! ( DELTA Merseyside Ltd & Veezu Holdings Ltd v Uber Britannia Ltd) In DELTA Merseyside Ltd & Veezu Holdings Ltd v Uber Britannia Ltd, part of the extensive litigation surrounding the ride‑hailing app Uber, proceedings that initially centred on worker status shifted towards how licensing Acts are to be read in the context of contractual dealings. That change of focus carried potential VAT ramifications for both the private hire industry and the travelling public, leading HMRC to commence a VAT consultation......
Diplomatic assistance for Gazan clients and rationality review ( R ( BEL & others) v SSFCDO) R (on the application of BEL BEB BCC BEC BKJ (by her litigation friend BSJ) BDM (by his litigation friend BSJ) v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2025] EWHC 1970 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The real-world impact is confined to a narrow group of Gazan clients. The ratio establishes that individuals who fall outside the FCDO’s Extended Eligibility Criteria ( EEC) can still be afforded diplomatic assistance by the FCDO to leave Gaza, provided they hold Article 8 Entry Clearance ( EC) for the UK. The FCDO already undertakes to assist a defined set of non‑ British nationals in Gaza where they meet the EEC. The EEC applies to those who: have a...
R ( Ammori) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWHC 2013 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? Grasping the effect of this judgment will assist practitioners advising clients on challenges to proscription decisions, particularly where the defendant advances an objection which, if resolved in the defendant’s favour, would be fatal to the claim. Such a contention should therefore be determined as a preliminary issue. In that context, the court will also consider whether the issue is liable to arise in other matters, and thus its broader significance. The court remarked that, although nothing prevents an organisation from seeking de-proscription soon after it is first proscribed, the original proscription decision is temporally distinct from a decision refusing a de-proscription application. Once a de-proscription application is lodged, the SSHD has 90 days to determine it. During that period, and then while any...
Taxi licensing— A hire of a Private Hire Vehicle ( PHV) is not a contract at the point of booking! ( DELTA Merseyside Ltd & Veezu Holdings Ltd v Uber Britannia Ltd) DELTA Merseyside Ltd & Veezu Holdings Ltd v Uber Britannia Ltd [2025] UKSC 31 What are the practical implications of this case? Local authority licensing officers and lawyers can, definitively, breathe easier: they no longer face the task of deciding whether private hire vehicle operators enter into contracts with passengers—a position the High Court had declared when interpreting LG( MP) A 1976, Pt II, before that declaration was discharged by the Court of Appeal. In the wake of Uber’s appeal being dismissed, Gerald Gouriet KC—who acted for DELTA in the High Court and for Veezu in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court—reflected on the litigation, noting that the path from the High Court to the...
In this issue: Social housing Planning Children's social care Education Social care Pensions Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Social housing Discretionary succession policies and the meaning of ‘stepchild’ ( Abdelrahman v London Borough of Islington) The appeal in Abdelrahman v The Mayor and Burgesses of The London Borough of Islington examined whether, when construing the council’s discretionary succession policy, a person in the appellant’s position—being the child of a deceased tenant’s partner from an earlier relationship—falls within the term ‘stepchild’. Ms Abdelrahman’s mother and Mr Seales (the secure tenant) were in a committed relationship but did not marry or enter a civil partnership. The Court of Appeal upheld HHJ Bloom’s first‑instance ruling that ‘stepchild’ refers to the child of a person’s spouse or civil partner by a previous marriage or civil...
Abdelrahman v The Mayor and Burgesses of The London Borough of Islington [2025] EWCA Civ 1038 What are the practical implications of this case? Interpreting policies The court reiterates to practitioners that deciding what a policy means is equally its function in housing as it is in other spheres, such as planning, where the point arises more often. A local authority may devise policies, including a discretionary succession policy, as part of its allocation scheme. Although applying a policy lies with the authority, construing its meaning is a question for the court. Even so, a policy is not to be read as though it were legislation or a contract (see, for instance, Tesco Stores Ltd v Dundee City Council [2012] UKSC 13 at paras [18]—[19])......
Border to Coast said the councils of Cambridgeshire, East Sussex, Essex, Hertfordshire, Kent, Northamptonshire and West Sussex — together representing about 830,000 members — have begun exclusive talks to join the pool. As at 31 March 2025, the pool oversees roughly £65bn in assets through 11 partner funds, serving 1.1 million members. These seven schemes had previously been part of the rival Access pool, but were compelled to seek new pooling partners after proposals from both Access and Brunel — another LGPS pool — were deemed not to satisfy the government’s vision for the future of the LGPS set out in its ‘fit for the future’ policy. Jeremy Hunt, Chair of the West Sussex Pension Fund and a former Chancellor, said in a statement on behalf......
R ( National Council for Civil Liberties) v Secretary of State for the Home Department ( Public Law Project and another intervening) [2025] EWCA Civ 571 What are the practical implications of this case? This Court of Appeal judgment, which affirms elements of the Divisional Court’s ruling, marks a significant statement on the core character of the right to protest as set out in the POA 1986. It is likewise notable for its treatment of the breadth of so-called Henry VIII powers to alter primary legislation through secondary instruments. The ruling supplies an uncommon, practical guide to the manner in which a court should interpret a statutory scheme that has been modified by subsequent measures. In particular, where the later provision derives from a Henry VIII power, the court’s first reference point must be the objective of the original statute. Only...
Farnsworth v The Information Commissioner ( IC) [2025] UKFTT 670 ( GRC) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision serves as a clear prompt for anyone managing information requests to scrutinise the applicability and breadth of exemptions under EIR 2004, SI 2004/3391, or FIOA 2000 where relevant. Erewash Council (the Council) treated the request as falling within EIR 2004, SI 2004/3391 and examined the exemptions in regulation 14. Initially, it considered relying on sub-paragraphs (a) and (e), but ultimately invoked sub-paragraph (d), covering ‘material which is still in the course of completion, to unfinished documents or to incomplete data’. Given that EIR 2004, SI 2004/3391 derives from European treaties to which the UK is a party, the judge stressed that such instruments must be read in good faith, according to their ordinary meaning, in context and in light of their...
In this issue: Social housing Highways Education Children's social care Social care Environmental law and climate change Lex Talk®Local Government: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Social housing When is a residential letting agent not a person managing a licensable HMO? When it is a ‘let-only’ arrangement ( Cetin v Epping Forest DC) An appeal before the Upper Tribunal in Cetin v Epping Forest District Council determined that a residential letting agent engaged on a ‘let only’ basis to let a single room in an HMO, who collects one instalment of rent on the day the letting is agreed and then has no further role, is not a ‘person managing’ the HMO for the purposes of section 263(3) of the Housing Act 2004. Accordingly, the agent does not assume the...
What are the practical implications of this case? This decision carries real weight for practitioners as it narrows HMO licensing offences and the levying of civil penalties to genuinely ‘ongoing’ management activities, rather than brief, ‘snapshot’ involvement by agents at the outset of a let. It is expected to bolster ‘let-only’ instructions for finding HMO occupants and putting tenancies in place. Local authority enforcement teams should treat this as essential reading and revisit any live matters targeting letting agents under comparable arrangements, particularly where the likelihood of achieving a conviction could be materially reduced... What was the background? The appellant was a director of Discover Residential Ltd (the Company), a letting agency based in Essex. On 20 April 2023, the respondent local housing authority issued him with a financial penalty of £7,064.32 after the Company—acting on a ‘let-only’ basis—had arranged the letting of rooms in a...
Building safety; statutory construction; retrospectivity; exercise of discretion by FTT; meaning of ‘just and equitable’ ( Triathlon Homes LLP v Stratford Village Development Partnership & Others) Triathlon Homes LLP v Stratford Village Development Partnership and other companies ( Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, intervening) [2025] EWCA Civ 846 What are the practical implications of this case? This is the first appellate ruling on RCOs and confirms the wide scope of matters the tribunal may weigh when using its discretion to make an order. There are several practical lessons for practitioners. In particular: first, the exposure to unknown and potential no‑fault‑based liabilities. It is now clear RCOs can be made for defects originating as long ago as 1992. A change in beneficial ownership of a developer, or of a company associated with a developer, will not absolve those companies from...
What are the practical implications of this case? The judicial review brought by Siderise, a maker and supplier of passive fire solutions, invited the court to scrutinise the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea’s decision to exclude Siderise as a supplier and to block its products. At this stage, the court’s role was confined to deciding whether permission for a full judicial review should be granted, and thus only whether there was an arguable case. The High Court’s May 2025 decision offers a useful pointer to how permission applications of this sort are likely to be approached. The court addressed whether the council had complied with its policies, whether it could lawfully exclude bidders under the Public Contract Regulations 2015 ( PCR 2015), SI 2015/102, and whether a limitation issue arose. The case matters not only for those involved in judicial review, who...
In this issue: Licensing Planning Social housing Education Children's social care Public procurement Governance Social care Local government finance Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Licensing Supreme Court clarifies operator liability under PHV licensing regime ( D. E. L. T. A. Merseyside Ltd v Uber Britannia Ltd) The Supreme Court has unanimously rejected Uber Britannia Ltd’s appeal, confirming that private hire operators outside London are not obliged to accept bookings as contracting principals. Philip Kolvin KC of 11KBW, counsel for the First Respondent, welcomed the ruling, saying it definitively protects the ability of operators, drivers and passengers to set their own contractual terms, preserving established industry practice and consumer choice. Josef Cannon KC of Cornerstone Barristers emphasised that section 56(1) imposes liability without prescribing contract form, allowing agency and intermediary models to continue across England and Wales. See News Analysis: Supreme Court clarifies operator liability under PHV licensing regime ( D. E. L. T. A....
R ( Ellis) v Secretary of State for Justice [2025] EWCA Civ 831 What are the practical implications of this case? This Court of Appeal ruling surveys the domestic and Strasbourg jurisprudence on the Convention right of access to education. It reiterates that the Convention right is tightly confined and typically does not impose a positive obligation on the state to provide any particular form of education or to achieve a specified standard. The judgment is noteworthy for its treatment of real-life limitations on educational access within prisons. However, such limits will not constitute an interference with the right unless they render access to education effectively impossible in practice. A further practical aspect concerns the framework for amending judicial review claims to include new or additional facts that arise after proceedings have been issued. The Court of Appeal endorsed a long line of...
Adriatic Land 5 Ltd v Long Leaseholders at Hippersley Point [2025] EWCA Civ 856 What are the practical implications of this case? Relevant service charge sums incurred by a landlord and already collected from leaseholders before the commencement of BSA 2022, Sch 8 remain unaffected. Conversely, where a landlord had not succeeded in recovering those categories of service charge costs from a leaseholder under a qualifying lease before the coming into force of BSA 2022, the landlord is now prevented from doing so by the new regime. In the same vein, any relevant service charges incurred after Sch 8 came into force are not recoverable. The effect is potentially far‑reaching, as other provisions within Sch 8 are phrased so as to apply retrospectively, including those addressing cladding remediation, and are therefore likely to have broader implications across similar claims. What was the...
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
