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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
( R (on the application of AY) v Vale of Glamorgan County Borough County [2025] EWCA Civ 671) What are the practical implications of this case? Viewed straightforwardly, the decision illustrates the settled public law stance on fairness: what fairness demands is fact-sensitive and turns on the totality of the circumstances. Unless a statute, expressly or by necessary implication, prescribes a particular procedural step—such as an oral hearing or the presence of legal representation—the content of a fair process is defined by the nature of the rights being determined and the broader context in which the decision is taken. In this instance, no enactment expressly required a parent to be accompanied by a solicitor at an IDP review meeting, and nothing in the surrounding circumstances made that necessary. The claimant sought to draw support from authority in a different educational setting, R ( Kumar) v...
In this issue: Planning Social housing Children’s social care Education Judicial review Environmental law and climate change Public procurement Governance Social care Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Planning Modernising planning committees—proposed reforms and implications On 28 May 2025, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government ( MHCLG) opened a technical consultation on changes to planning committees in England, which runs until 23 July 2025. Sitting within implementation of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, the measures are designed to update how planning choices are made. The package is intended to improve the efficiency, reliability and calibre of decisions nationwide. Through consistent delegation, streamlined committee arrangements, compulsory training and sharper performance measures, government intends to deliver a more agile planning service that underpins sustainable development and boosts economic growth. See News Analysis: Modernising planning committees—proposed reforms and implications. Planning reform working paper—reforming site thresholds The government has issued a working paper on...
Judicial Review— High Court quashes decision refusing recusal application ( R ( Ladybill) v Sheffield Magistrates’ Court & Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council) R (on the application of Ladybill Ltd) v Sheffield Magistrates Court [2025] EWHC 1169 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? Appreciating the ramifications of this judgment should aid practitioners who advise clients on recusal applications in matters where judicial bias may potentially be in issue or suspected. The High Court observed that allegations of actual bias directed at judicial decisions in this jurisdiction are uncommon, and rarely feature in challenges to judicial decision‑making. Far more frequently, the complaint concerns apparent bias, instead of allegations of actual prejudice. The governing test for apparent bias comes from Porter v Magill [2001] UKHL 67: ‘whether the fair minded and informed observer, having considered the facts, would consider that there was a real...
Misuse of AI in court and the consequences ( Ayinde v Haringey & Al- Haroun v Qatar National Bank) R (on the application of Frederick Ayinde) v Haringey London Borough Council; Al- Haroun v Qatar National Bank QPSC and another company [2025] EWHC 1383 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling sets out explicit directions for lawyers who deploy AI, so that they remain within their professional obligations. The court also outlined what must happen when practitioners discover that they, their wider team, or their client has misused AI. Generative AI systems, including Chat GPT, are not a dependable source of legal research. They can offer convincing but inaccurate claims, refer to authorities that do not exist and attribute quotations to genuine materials that are not present in those texts. Both the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Bar...
In this issue: Governance Planning Social housing Children’s social care Social care Healthcare Education Environmental law and climate change Local government finance Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Governance Equality Act 2010 provisions refer to biological sex, regardless of gender recognition certificate ( For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers) The Supreme Court ruled that, within the Equality Act 2010 ( Eq A 2010), the words ‘man’, ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ denote biological sex. Treating the relevant provisions as embracing ‘certificated sex’ by virtue of a gender recognition certificate ( GRC) would render them incoherent and unworkable, and thus cannot be done. For sex discrimination claims, an individual has the protected characteristic of biological sex only. The relevant parts of the Eq A 2010 fall within section 9(3) of the Gender...
On 28th May 2025, the government issued a working paper inviting views on reforming site size thresholds in the planning system to better support housing delivery across different types of sites. It examines how varying site sizes should be treated within the planning system and considers removing barriers specific to developers in this part of the sector. Responses are invited by 9 July 2025. It is the government’s intention to implement changes to development thresholds through amendments to secondary legislation and to introduce other measures (eg a simplified biodiversity net gain ( BNG) metric). The paper sets out a tiered approach that groups residential developments into three thresholds: minor developments: projects with fewer than ten homes or on sites up to 0.5 hectares medium developments: a new proposed category for developments between 10 and 49 homes or up to one...
For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16, [2025] 2 All ER 759 What are the practical implications of this case? Employers, service organisations and public bodies ought to audit existing policies and procedures to ensure they accord with discrimination law as articulated by the Supreme Court. This ruling is especially salient amid the continuing public and political debate about the rights of trans people and of women, whether those rights clash, and the ways the law presently does, and ought to, accommodate them. The UK government welcomed the decision; the Minister for Women and Equalities, Bridget Phillipson, said it ‘brings welcome clarity and confidence for women and service providers’. However, some lawyers and organisations criticised the outcome, voicing concern about its impact on trans people’s rights. On 25 April 2025, the Equality and Human Rights Commission announced a...
In this issue: Public procurement Children’s social care Planning Governance Education Social care Social housing Environmental law and climate change Lex Talk®Local Government: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Public procurement The logistics of lifting the automatic suspension—the use of the American Cyanamid test in an application to lift an automatic suspension under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 ( Unipart Group Ltd and another company v Supply Chain Coordination Ltd) In Unipart Group Ltd and another company v Supply Chain Coordination Ltd, Supply Chain Coordination Ltd ( SCCL), the public body overseeing the NHS Supply Chain, sought to remove the automatic bar after objections from losing bidders— Unipart Group Ltd ( Unipart) and D. H. L. Supply Chain Ltd ( DHL)—arising out of a logistics services tender governed by the...
R (on the application of A, by his litigation friend B) v North Central London Integrated Care Board [2025] EWCA Civ 485 What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling emphasises: the need to disclose any document that could affect the outcome of a judicial review, and to work closely with the other side’s legal team so that all pertinent materials are before the court as necessary and entirely appropriate......
What is the background to this consultation and how does it fit in with the IPO’s transformation programme? The IPO’s transformation programme is an ambitious upgrade designed to streamline how UK IP rights are filed, administered and contested. Its ambition is to provide a single, integrated digital platform spanning patents, trade marks, designs and IPO tribunal services. In 2022 the IPO ran a public consultation on the changes needed to underpin its forthcoming digital patents service, scheduled for release later on in 2025. The government’s reply, issued in August 2023, set out several legal and procedural adjustments necessary to support construction of that service. A further consultation followed in 2023 to shape the subsequent phase of the programme, this time covering trade marks, designs and tribunal services. The government’s response, published on 10 April 2025, confirmed its intended approach to a range of...
The Mayor and Commonality and Citizens of The City of London v 48th Street Holding Ltd and another company [2025] EWHC 1130 ( KB) What was the background? The second defendant (‘ POLL’) traded in devising rate mitigation schemes (the RMS) for empty premises for third parties. The first defendant, 48SHL, implemented one such arrangement and relied on it as a defence to a claim for non‑domestic rates. Under the arrangement, once relevant property fell vacant, section 45(1) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 together with the Non‑ Domestic Rating ( Unoccupied Property) ( England) Regulations 2008, SI 2008/386, regs 3 and 4a, operated to confer an exemption from liability for unoccupied rates for three months and, on the expiry of that three‑month period. To facilitate this, 48SHL granted POLL a lease of the premises and, at the same time, served a break notice...
In this issue: Governance Education Local government finance Planning Healthcare Social care Social housing Environmental law and climate change Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Governance No substantive legitimate expectation from an oral assurance ( R ( Grantchester PC) v Greater Cambridge Partnership) The High Court determined that a purported verbal assurance by a local councillor, given at an informal meeting with Grantchester residents, did not create a legitimate expectation that the proposed greenway would avoid the village if residents withheld support. It held that a substantive legitimate expectation—amounting, in effect, to a villagers’ veto—can only arise from an oral statement where there is ‘a particularly clear and unequivocal promise’. Owing to the uncertainty surrounding the oral evidence of what was actually said, Mrs Justice Lieven considered it improbable that the councillor made any statement capable of constituting a binding commitment. The court’s reasoning underscores the forensic challenge of proving a...
R ( Grantchester Parish Council) v Greater Cambridge Partnership [2025] EWHC 923 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? This was a highly atypical judicial review, because five witnesses gave oral testimony to resolve the single disputed issue of whether, in the terms alleged by the claimant, a local councillor made an oral commitment at an informal meeting. As might be expected, differing recollections across the witnesses meant the oral evidence was ultimately inconclusive. The court applied the practical guidance in Gestmin v Credit Suisse [2013] EWHC 3560 ( Comm)—guidance more often seen in commercial litigation—namely that a judge should place little, if any, reliance on what witnesses recall being said in meetings and conversations, and should instead anchor factual findings in contemporaneous documents and in known or probable facts. Accordingly, the court preferred the documentary record and the inherent...
What are the practical implications of this case? Practitioners operating within professional discipline can draw reassurance from this ruling: the courts continue to adopt a firm stance of deference to the expert judgment of lay panels, both in establishing the facts and in applying the bespoke procedural rules that govern their specialist fields. This reinforces the primacy of sector-specific frameworks and acknowledges the panels’ institutional competence. The court’s hesitance to import criminal law principles into proceedings that are civil in character keeps the playing field even for participants—prosecutors, defence representatives and the legal advisers supporting panels—by limiting opportunities for satellite disputes. In turn, this curbs the mission creep that regulatory tribunals often face when confronted with protracted applications contesting the admissibility of evidence or pressing for good character directions in hearings not intended to grapple with the complexities of criminal court...
In this issue: Highways Public procurement Education Social care Planning Children's social care Local government finance Governance Pensions Social housing Licensing Environmental law and climate change Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Highways Supreme Court confirms that section 10(1) of Dartmoor Commons Act confers a public right of access which extends to wild camping as a form of open-air recreation ( Darwall and another v Dartmoor National Park Authority) In Darwall and another v Dartmoor National Park Authority, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal by Mr and Mrs Darwall, finding that section 10(1) of the Dartmoor Commons Act 1985 ( DCA 1985) confers a public right of access that includes wild camping as a type of open-air recreation. Hannah Brown, senior solicitor, and Matthew Mc Feeley, partner, at...
Background This appeal examines the breadth of the public’s access rights over Dartmoor under DCA 1985, s 10(1). The court was asked to decide whether that provision gives members of the public permission to erect tents or otherwise camp overnight on the Dartmoor Commons (the Commons). Section 10(1) states, in effect, that, subject to the Act and observance of any rules, regulations or byelaws in force for the commons, the public enjoys a right of access to the commons on foot or on horseback for the purpose of outdoor recreation. The Dartmoor National Park ( DNPA) was designated as a national park in 1951 under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 ( NPACA 1949). Within DNPA there are areas of moorland that are privately owned, yet other local people hold rights to place their livestock there. The...
What are the practical implications of this case? The practical ramifications of this decision are notable. It examines the impact of international treaty duties in Article 5 ECHR upon domestic law. At first instance, Lieven J disagreed with Mr Justice Keehan’s reasoning in A Local Authority v D and others [2015] EWHC 3125 ( Fam), [2016] 2 FLR 601, stating that he had merged two discrete issues. Keehan J’s concern was that a local authority is an organ of the State and, therefore, when a child’s liberty is restricted, the State is responsible for a deprivation, necessitating a procedure prescribed by law, proper safeguards and periodical reviews. Lieven J, by contrast, accepted that the child’s restrictions were imposed by the State, yet maintained that this does not mean the local authority, acting as the corporate parent under [section 33 of the Children Act 1989 ( Ch A...
Vanhove v Secretary of State for Education and another [2025] EWHC 191 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment clarifies the proper approach for courts when hearing appeals under the Teachers’ Disciplinary ( England) Regulations 2012, SI 2012/560, reg 17. The appellant maintained that the appeal ought to be a full rehearing, whereas the respondent argued the court should conduct a review of the Professional Conduct Panel’s (the Panel) decision to check that it was lawful and procedurally fair. Mr Justice Sweeting concluded that the correct course is a review. Reaffirming principles from earlier authorities, he stressed that Panels, having observed the witnesses first-hand, are best placed to determine disputed factual issues. Consequently, the court should attach weight to the Panel’s evaluation of witness credibility and to the expertise of both the Panel and the Secretary of State for...
RP v Barnsley Metropolitan District Council [2025] UKUT 46 ( AAC) What are the practical implications of this case? As Tribunal Judge Mc Carthy recognised when allowing permission to appeal, mistakes such as faulty bundle pagination are a commonplace hazard in tribunal proceedings and would not, in the ordinary run of things, vitiate fairness. That RP was able to persuade the Upper Tribunal that, in her particular circumstances, they did affect the fairness is notable and will no doubt galvanise practitioners to ensure bundles are clearly, correctly, and consistently paginated, all the more in matters where parents attend without representation. Further, the expectation that revised EHCPs would be issued shortly should not have dissuaded the First-tier Tribunal from directing the necessary alterations to the plans then in force. What was......
R (on the application of Tesco Stores Ltd) v Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council and another company [2025] EWCA Civ 610 What are the practical implications of this case? The Court of Appeal, in this judgment, returned to Hopkins Homes Ltd v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] UKSC 37 and Tesco v Dundee City Council [2012] UKSC 13, underscoring the separation between construing planning policy and putting it into effect in practice. Deciding what a policy issued by a local planning authority or the Secretary of State means is, as a matter of law, a question for the court to resolve. By contrast, deploying that policy when determining applications and appeals is for the decision-maker, and is amenable to challenge only on public law grounds. The Court of Appeal also stressed that construing policy should be...
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
