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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Changes on the horizon— AI to be in scope and hints of a more pro-consumer balance The UK Law Commission has unveiled a fresh project to reassess the framework for civil liability arising from defective products in the UK, a field presently set by the Consumer Protection Act 1987 ( CPA 1987). Long anticipated, this move follows sustained debate about the UK’s post- Brexit trajectory. In particular, attention has focused on the extensive, pro-consumer reform of the EU regime—on which the UK’s CPA 1987 is founded—first unveiled in September 2022 and now enshrined in Directive ( EU) 2024/2853, the Revised EU Product Liability Directive (the Revised EU PLD). Observers have expected such a step for some time, especially as the EU has pressed ahead with its revisions, prompting calls for clarity on the UK’s direction......
Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd and 80 others ( No 2) [2025] UKPC 34 The facts Heard on appeal from Bermuda, the dispute centred in essence on the amalgamation of two companies— Jardine Strategic Ltd ( Jardine Strategic) and JMH Bermuda Ltd—the successor entity that was created as a result of that transaction, Jardine Strategic Holdings Ltd (the Company), and those Jardine Strategic shareholders who themselves opposed the amalgamation at a special general meeting. The companies formed part of the Jardine Matheson group, a conglomerate with stakes in numerous portfolio companies active particularly in both China and South- East Asia. Its ultimate holding company, a Bermudian entity, was quoted on the London Stock Exchange and also maintained secondary quotations on the Singapore and Bermuda public exchanges. Pursuant to section 106 of Bermuda’s Companies Act 1981, any...
Contemporary relevance and practical insight The text begins by clearly charting how the key doctrines of negligence emerged, anchoring its examination in the maturation of employer liability within the wider tort landscape. It traces the origins of the duty of care, breach, causation, apportionment and contribution, together with the practical difficulties of applying these doctrines to changing patterns of modern employment. This orientation is especially valuable, as a solid grasp of these principles is indispensable for any student or practitioner working in this challenging and developing sphere of tort. From this secure platform, the book moves on to provide critical, in-depth evaluations of particular facets of employer’s liability, with each section written by experienced practitioners in the relevant field. The treatment offers not only up-to-the-minute analysis and pertinent case law, but also forward-looking reflections on possible trajectories for the law’s future growth. By way of...
PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—7 August 2025 In this issue: Vicarious liability Road traffic collisions Incidents overseas Product liability Clinical negligence Costs CPR updates AI and legal technology developments in litigation Further PI and clinical negligence news Lex Talk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Lexis Nexis® Webinars Useful information Vicarious liability Vicarious liability, akin to employment and true independent contractors Liability for the conduct of individuals engaged by, or acting for, others has been closely examined and broadened by recent Supreme Court authorities ( Various Claimants v Barclays Bank Plc, Various Claimants v Catholic Child Welfare Society and BXB v Trustees of the Barry Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses). Yet, notwithstanding that development, the High Court affirmed the ongoing relevance and status of genuinely...
J D Wetherspoon Plc v Burger and another company [2025] EWHC 1259 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling matters greatly to anyone who hires (or is perceived to have hired) a third party to act on their behalf. Its effect is felt widely across the hospitality industry, notably where security provision is concerned. Yet it is just as significant in any sphere that retains contractors to deliver services for another party. The hazard is being saddled with liability for what a third party does while performing a specialist task. If that boundary were not maintained, the very notion of a truly independent contractor would be undermined and the commercial allocation of risk diluted. Too often, commercial clients are left potentially liable when the contractor fails to answer a claim or engage with it. That can become a very costly...
In June, Stack Data Strategy, commissioned by the International Legal Finance Association ( ILFA), surveyed 765 UK business leaders and uncovered notably robust backing for litigation funding overall. Over two-thirds (68%) held a favourable view of it, while only 7% were negative or opposed to it. A further survey of 1,501 UK adults by the same organisation also showed that merely 43% feel able to take on big companies unaided, with 29% not very confident and 21% not at all confident. Seventy-five percent said they would consider using litigation funding to help level the playing field when confronting corporate misconduct and wrongdoing. This, noted Rachael Kent, senior lecturer in digital economy and society at King’s College London, reflects what is seen in practice, pointing to a genuine justice gap that litigation funding helps bridge in the UK......
The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology was ultimately still unable to convince High Court Judge Jonathan Richards to bar the performers— Mark Harper, Milo Deering, Kudisan Kai and Antonio Sol—from serving as representative claimants. He did, however, also agree to prevent two US entertainment unions from bringing proceedings on their members’ behalf. Judge Richards firmly dismissed the government’s contention that the proposed representatives may lack the 'same interest' as the class they seek to represent—a prerequisite under the UK Civil Procedure Rules. He further found there was 'no objectionable lack of clarity' in how the class was defined. The government did establish that, at present, there is 'no proposal' for calculating each individual performer’s loss if the musicians succeed. Even so, Judge Richards chose to allow the claimants a genuine opportunity to grapple with those...
How are current UK laws addressing the distinction between private and rental e-scooter use and what (if any) legal grey areas still exist? Relying on a strand of older authorities, e-scooters and comparable micromobility devices are treated as 'motor vehicles' under section 185(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 ( RTA 1988). Authorities include Chief Constable of North Yorkshire Police v Saddington [2000] Lexis Citation 3984, DPP v King [2008] EWHC 447 ( Admin), and Coates v Crown Prosecution Service [2011] EWHC 2032 ( Admin). The consequence is that riders require insurance and a driving licence, and the machine must be registered, display number plates, and satisfy construction regulations. Realistically, fulfilling these obligations is not possible. Therefore, privately owned e-scooters may only be used on private land with the landowner’s permission. During the Pandemic, the Electric Scooter Trials and Traffic Signs (...
Jones v Persons Unknown & others [2025] EWHC 1823 ( Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? The judgment offers clear direction for non-parties affected by judgments, delineating the scope of CPR 40.9 and the considerations the court will weigh when determining whether an application ought to be granted. Particularly noteworthy is the court’s restrictive approach to what qualifies as a ‘direct’ effect for these purposes, despite other authorities appearing to endorse a broader construction, including the decision of Hill J in Shell UK v Persons Unknown [2023] EWHC 1229. In this case, the court rejected the applicant’s argument that the depletion of its assets, arising during satisfaction of a judgment to which it was not subject, rendered it directly affected. Instead, the court held that being directly affected requires the conduct in question to stem immediately from an obligation in the...
The bank and the Magic Circle practice—while rejecting any wrongdoing—brought their courtroom clash to a close via a confidential settlement, as recorded in a High Court order dated 23 July 2025. Soc Gen’s action stemmed from Clifford Chance’s work for the bank in a quarrel with Turkish jewellery business Goldas Kuyumculuk Sanayi Ithalat Ihracat AS concerning gold bullion valued at US$483m. According to the bank, Soc Gen had shipped nearly 16 metric tonnes of bullion to the company, only to discover later that it had started using the gold without paying for it......
In this issue: CPR updates Employer's liability Clinical negligence Coroner's inquests Claims involving a fatality Costs Other PI and clinical negligence news Lex Talk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Lexis Nexis® Webinars Useful information CPR updates 185th Practice Direction update—online claims—in force 18 July 2025 The Master of the Rolls and the Minister of State for Justice have issued the 185th Practice Direction update to the Civil Procedure Rules, taking effect on 18 July 2025. It revises CPR PD 51R ( Online Civil Money Claims) and CPR PD 51ZB ( Damages Claims Pilot), and inserts a new fixed costs section within CPR PD 51R. Both pilot schemes are extended by a further 12 months, now running until 1 October 2026. See: LNB News 30/07/2025 24. 186th and 188th practice...
On 23 July 2025, the High Court concluded there was reason to think Shift Global Holdings Ltd and, by extension, Corja Holdings Ltd could not satisfy Yodel Delivery Network Ltd’s costs if they were to lose their claim that the delivery group owes them shares equal to 60% of its equity under an option agreement. Judge Simon Gleeson observed that few cases provide a clearer example of heavy litigation and prospective costs will plainly be substantial. Yodel commenced proceedings against the two firms, owned by tech entrepreneur Jacob Corlett, after Corlett resigned as a director in June 2024. The company alleged Corlett misapplied corporate assets by paying himself and Shift in breach of his director’s duties. In response, Shift brought a counterclaim asserting that Yodel is obliged to issue cheap subscription warrants representing 60% of delivery business’s value......
Clarity & Calm Post- PACCAR ( Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd and another company v Alex Neill Class Representative Ltd and other cases) Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd and another company v Alex Neill Class Representative Ltd and other cases [2025] EWCA Civ 841 What are the practical implications of this case? After the Supreme Court’s ruling in PACCAR, many LFAs were revised to incorporate equivalent (or comparable) multiples-based terms to those scrutinised in the Sony appeals. Those appeals were put on hold following the previous government’s introduction of the Litigation Funding Agreements ( Enforceability) Bill (the Bill), with the stay later lifted when the current government signalled it would not re-introduce the Bill until the Civil Justice Council’s ( CJC) review of litigation funding in the UK had concluded. In the interim, funders have awaited a determination on the...
PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—24 July 2025 In this issue: Key PI and Clinical negligence developments Occupational disease Accidents abroad Other PI and Clinical negligence news Lex Talk® PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Lexis Nexis® Webinars Useful information Key PI and Clinical negligence developments SI 2025/893 ( Civil Procedure ( Amendment No 2) Rules 2025) modifies the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, SI 1998/3132, revising Rule 2.8 (time) and Rule 5.5 (filing and sending documents) to reflect the roll-out of new Practice Direction 5C covering the CE- File electronic filing and case management system, following its piloting under Practice Direction 51O (electronic working pilot scheme). The changes come into force in part on 12 September 2025, and in full on 1 October 2025. Refer to LNB News 22/07/2025 19 for details. NHS Resolution publishes Annual Report and Accounts for 2024/25 NHS Resolution has issued its Annual Report and...
What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling deepens the existing jurisprudence, equipping advisers to identify when an injured worker’s conduct remains sufficiently connected to their job, even after they have finished their paid shift. It offers a crisp survey of the leading authorities on that point and will aid both claimant and defence practitioners in guiding clients on potential exposure. On costs, the judgment neatly distils the doctrine of Sanderson orders—namely, the circumstances in which an unsuccessful defendant should meet the costs of a successful defendant, together with the claimant’s costs incurred in pursuing the losing claim. The judge undertook a thorough evaluation of all factors bearing on the grant of such relief. As a result, the decision provides a practical and illuminating example of the applicable principles. Both sides will find the analysis relevant when advising on...
The County Court system is 'dysfunctional' and has 'failed' adequately to deliver civil justice across England and Wales, was concluded in a report by the House of Commons Justice Committee dated 21 July 2025. Andy Slaughter, who chairs the cross-party committee, stated it is imperative that improving the County Court becomes a key priority for the Ministry of Justice, given the unacceptable delays affecting almost all categories of claims. The Labour Party MP said the inefficiencies and holdups stem from years of underfunding. ' Justice delayed is justice denied', Slaughter observed. The committee urged that a review of the County Court system should commence by spring 2026, describing its condition as dire and demanding urgent attention. It concluded the coronavirus ( COVID-19) pandemic has added to the delays. He warned that delays are now increasing across most claim types......
A panel of three judges unanimously ruled that the treatment of District Court Judge Kate Thomas over her unsuccessfulapplication for promotion in 2021 was 'neither appropriate nor fair'. Thomas was not informed that the JAC could deploy statutory consultation – also termed secret soundings – to gather views from a broader circle of judges. Nor did the commission consider whether she ought to be offered an opportunity to answer the adverse comments that resulted in her being turned down. However, the court refused to set aside the JAC’s choice not to appoint her to a Circuit Court role. The judges said they could not determine if the commission’s dependence on critical feedback was unlawful, as they do not know what was said. By law, the commission must consult a person who has held the office to be filled, or someone with other relevant...
J PMorgan Chase Bank NA v VTB Bank PJSC The 5 June ruling of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales in this case stands as a landmark statement on the authority of the English courts to grant anti-suit and anti-enforcement injunctions, at a time when cross-border banking conflicts routinely span numerous legal systems. Emerging from intricate demand guarantee arrangements and concurrent Russian litigation, the judgment firmly reasserts English jurisdictional precedence where parties have agreed to exclusive arbitration clauses. Central to the decision is a judicial insistence on the sanctity of bargain amid an international banking landscape marked by sovereign intrusion and simultaneous suits. The dispute traces back to JPMorgan Chase’s issuance of a demand guarantee for VTB Bank, expressly governed by English law and containing exclusive London Court of International Arbitration ( LCIA) provisions....
In this issue: Key PI and clinical negligence news Product liability Accidents on the highway Clinical negligence Portal claims Costs and funding Case management Lex Talk® PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Lexis Nexis® Webinars Useful information Key PI and clinical negligence news Mo J publishes proposed amendments to RTA Small Claims Protocol to streamline OIC portal for whiplash claims The Ministry of Justice has tabled notable revisions to the Pre- Action Protocol for Personal Injury Claims Below the Small Claims Limit in Road Traffic Accidents, concentrating on paragraphs 11.7 and 11.8. Shaped by user input and industry consultation, the proposals would see the Official Injury Claim portal automatically produce the templates currently located in annexes C and D, thereby expediting claims for non-protocol vehicle costs. The...
Note: the CPRC no longer distributes the underlying papers with the minutes, and consequently no documents explaining the matters discussed are supplied alongside this News Analysis. A copy of the minutes can be found here: Minutes of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee. Welcome, apologies and introductory remarks (item 1) The minutes of the 9 May 2025 meeting were approved (for more detail, see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—9 May 2025). From the action log, the following items were recorded: Forms and standard orders—various strands of work remain in progress, and a new working group will be created. The Chair and Secretariat will finalise the finer details outside the committee. Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024—drafting was agreed under item 3 at the Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—9 May 2025, and the finalised draft is now...
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
