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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Bin Obaid v Al- Hezaimi [2024] EWCA Civ 612 What are the practical implications of this case? This Court of Appeal ruling endorses and affirms an earlier judgment of Joanne Wicks KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) on the correct construction of a release clause in a settlement deed. No bespoke principles of interpretation apply to such terms. On a fair reading, the release provision preserved the entitlement to commence proceedings in another jurisdiction, provided the causes of action did not intersect with those discharged by the settlement agreement. The Court of Appeal likewise favoured a confined reading, so that claims first advanced in English proceedings fell outside the issues determined there where, by subsequent amendment, they had been removed from the statement of case. In short, the appellate court confirmed that ordinary interpretative tools apply in ordinary legal fashion, and that...
In this issue: Liability Daily and weekly news alerts Useful information Liability Cavanaugh v Folsana Pressed Sections Ltd PSYCHIATRIC INJURY AND OCCUPATIONAL STRESS. The King's Bench Division rejected the claim by the claimant, former employee, against his former employer ( Folsana) for damages for psychiatric injury. The claimant, dismissed for gross misconduct, alleged that Folsana had suspended him without reasonable and proper cause, and contended that its breaches of duty, contractual and tortious, in suspending him and subjecting him to disciplinary investigation, resulted in his psychiatric injury......
In this issue: Case management Other PI & Clinical Negligence news Daily and weekly news alerts Useful information Case management Litigation funding agreements—termination clauses The Lexis Nexis® Restructuring & Insolvency and Dispute Resolution practical guidance teams have released a fresh Practice Note entitled ‘ Litigation funding agreements—termination clauses’......
A Court of Appeal ruling poised to reshape civil case management will have ‘wide-ranging consequences’ for the judiciary and the commercial courts, Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr told delegates at a London legal conference. Carr LJ observed that the judgment she delivered in 2023 with the Master of the Rolls, Geoffrey Vos, in Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough, means judges will ‘increasingly be called upon’ to decide whether to compel the use of alternative dispute resolution. It also raises the ‘broader question of which form of dispute resolution to mandate’, she said at London International Disputes Week. The November 2023 ruling confirmed that courts can direct parties to mediate or to take part in another variety of ADR. She underlined consequences for judges and the commercial courts in particular, as she spoke......
EF v LM and another [2024] EWHC 922 ( Fam), [2024] All ER ( D) 23 ( May) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling underscores the intricate questions surrounding consent in relation to transgender adolescents and children. From 16 up to, but not yet 18, a young person may consent to medical treatment under section 8 of the Family Law Reform Act 1969, without needing approval from a parent or guardian. The judgment, however, calls into question whether that autonomy alone sufficiently protects the young person’s best interests. Although the court retains power to step in and set aside a young person’s consent where the decision is grave enough to justify intervention ( Re W ( A Minor) ( Consent to Medical Treatment) [1993] 1 FLR 1), this case sharpens the issue of when judicial intervention should occur. It also starkly...
Litigation funding agreements—termination clauses Consult the Practice Note for summaries on termination clauses...
In this issue: Road traffic accidents Damages Costs Other PI & Clinical negligence news Daily and weekly news alerts Road traffic accidents Automated Vehicles Act 2024 This Act sets the framework for the use of automated vehicles on highways and in other public spaces, and makes additional provision relating to vehicle automation. It took effect in part on 20 May 2024, and will be commenced in full on a date to be named by Regulations made by the Secretary of State. See: LNB News 23/05/2024 17. Damages Mo J publishes PIDR expert panel meeting minutes for April 2024 The Ministry of Justice ( Mo J) has issued the minutes of the Personal Injury Discount Rate ( PIDR) expert panel meeting held on 25 April 2024......
Challis v Bradpiece [2024] EWHC 1124 ( SCCO) What are the practical implications of this case? This appears to be the first judgment (so far as the writer is aware) to squarely consider whether qualified one-way costs shifting extends to detailed assessment proceedings. The ruling will assist claimant solicitors, who can now confidently tell clients that QOCS protection runs for the full duration of a personal injury claim. Those representing defendants are likely to be dismayed, as this removes a valuable bargaining lever, notably in matters where the principal claim was issued before the April 2023 revisions to the QOCS rules. As the hearing took place in the Supreme Court Costs Office, its precedential weight is, in most situations, persuasive rather than binding, and therefore does not rule out further challenges. Even so, the deputy costs judge undertook a...
PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—23 May 2024 In this issue: CPR Case management Costs Other PI and clinical negligence news Daily and weekly news alerts Useful information CPR Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—12 April 2024 The CPRC minutes from 12 April 2024 address several matters, including alternative dispute resolution following the Court of Appeal’s decision in Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2023] EWCA Civ 1416, proposals for fixed recoverable costs in clinical negligence cases below £25,000, CPR changes relating to the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters, the introduction of a new CPR 68 to support the effective operation of the European Union ( Withdrawal) Act 2018, service by email on parties within the jurisdiction, and updates on the Damages and Money Claims pilots (under CPR PD 51ZB and CPR PD...
Watford Control Instruments Ltd v Brown [2024] EWHC 1125 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment is notable for addressing the infrequently used basis for striking out proceedings for want of prosecution. It observes that the principal and best-known authority on the point, the House of Lords decision in Grovit v Doctor [1997] 1 WLR 640, predates the CPR. So too does a further case on the appropriate sanction when such want of prosecution is established, Board of Governors of the National Heart and Chest Hospital v Chettle (1998) 30 HLR 618. Nevertheless, the court confirms that the principles articulated in those authorities remain good law and have not been displaced by the advent of the CPR. Where the court is satisfied a claimant has ‘warehoused’ the case—issuing it, taking no steps to advance it, yet keeping it alive so it can be...
WH Holding Ltd v E20 Stadium LLP [2024] EWHC 817 ( Comm) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision offers practical appellate guidance on the criteria for a court to order, under CPR 5.4C(4), limits on a non-party’s access to statements of case placed on the court file. It explains the basis and approach the court should take. Parties applying to curtail access to statements of case (or non-parties contesting such curbs) should bear in mind the following: The starting position, founded on the open justice principle, is that non-parties ought to obtain access to statements of case once the defendant has lodged an acknowledgement of service or a defence Whether there has been any judicial engagement in the proceedings at the time of the application is immaterial......
Note: The CPRC has stopped circulating the supporting papers alongside the minutes, so this News Analysis does not include documents explaining the topics discussed. A copy of the minutes can be found here: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting. Welcome, action log and matters arising (item 1) The minutes of the 1 March 2024 meeting were approved—see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—1 March 2024. The following points arose that were not addressed under later agenda items: E-working pilot CPR PD 51O— Master Sullivan and Chief Chancery Master Karen Shuman will undertake an initial review. As the pilot PD is scheduled to expire on 1 November 2024, the proposal is to report to the June 2024 meeting, to enable inclusion in the summer update with a possible in-force date in October...
PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—16 May 2024 In this issue: Road traffic accidents Claims involving a child Coroner's inquests Other PI and clinical negligence news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content New Q& As Useful information Road traffic accidents Application for retrospective approval of interim payments dismissed The King’s Bench Division in Mehmood (by his litigation friend, Mrs Asma Islam, pending determination by the court) v Mayor [2024] All ER ( D) 35 ( May) rejected the claimant’s bid to retrospectively approve a £10,000 interim payment made in 2019 and to obtain a further £75,000. The personal injury proceedings arose from a road traffic collision in which the claimant, a motorcyclist, sustained a significant brain injury after impact with the defendant’s vehicle. The claimant maintained the case was worth over £200,000. In an amended...
Consult Practice Note: Litigation funding agreements—representations and warranties. For...
The Solicitors Regulation Authority ( SRA) plans to refer a solicitor to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal ( SDT) in relation to a purportedly menacing SLAPP (shorthand for strategic lawsuit against public participation) aimed at silencing Dan Neidle. Neidle, once a partner at Clifford Chance LLP, set up Tax Policy Associates, a think tank. On 10 May 2024, the SRA confirmed its intention to refer a matter concerning an Osborne Clarke individual. The watchdog declined to provide more information or verify the partner’s identity. On his Tax Policy Associates website, Neidle published extensive material about his inquiry into Zahawi’s tax affairs. He outlined exchanges with Osborne Clarke partner, Ashley Hurst. Neidle released a letter from Hurst requesting that he withdraw assertions that the MP had been dishonest. The correspondence was marked confidential and ‘without prejudice’, and warned it would be a ‘serious matter’ if he...
In this issue: Road traffic accidents Damages Costs Other PI and clinical negligence news Daily and weekly news alerts Useful information Road traffic accidents The Supreme Court confirms approach to damages in mixed injury cases following whiplash reforms We recently noted that, in Hassam v Rabot, the Supreme Court examined how the ‘whiplash reforms’ operate, setting a statutory tariff for damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity ( PSLA) in whiplash claims, when dealing with ‘mixed injury’ scenarios where PSLA stems from both whiplash and other, non‑whiplash, injuries sustained in the same incident. The Court concluded that PSLA should be assessed using a broadly two-step method. First, the judge should total the tariff figure for the whiplash element with the common law award for PSLA relating to the non‑whiplash injury. Secondly, the court should decide whether a...
Afan Valley Ltd (in administration) v Lupton Fawcett (a firm) [2024] EWHC 909 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? Where a professional negligence action is contemplated, advisers evaluating loss must examine the claimant’s actual factual position with rigour. That assessment must reflect the circumstances as they truly are, rather than how they might ideally be presented. In relation to a strike out on factual causation, when that question is disputed, it will ordinarily call for a trial so the evidence can be tested before the court determines that factual causation is not made out. Summary disposal will rarely be suitable where competing factual narratives persist. As for ex turpi causa, advisers should continue to consider whether applying the doctrine would run counter to the underlying objective of the prohibition that has been breached. What was the...
A Merck-y saga— Merck KGa A to obtain partial declaratory relief following Merck, Sharpe & Dohme’s use of MERCK marks in the UK ( Merck v Merck) Merck KGa A v Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC and other companies [2024] EWHC 820 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling stops short of laying down hard rules on when a court should exercise its discretion to issue declaratory relief, but it does consolidate several important authorities on the topic. The court referenced the following decisions: Nokia Corp v Inter Digital Technology Corp [2006] EWCA Civ 1618 Financial Services Authority v Rourke [2001] Lexis Citation 2268 Amstrad Consumer Electronics Plc v British Phonographic Industry Ltd [1985] Lexis Citation 1288 Invest Bank PSC v El- Husseini [2003] EWHC 3350 ( Comm) (not reported by Lexis...
Deutsche Bank Ag v Sebastian Holdings Inc [2024] EWCA Civ 245 What are the practical implications of this case? The Court of Appeal overturned the first‑instance determination, which had decided that interest on costs becomes ‘due’ at the point it accrues, thereby imposing a six‑year limitation period running from the date of the relevant authority for costs. In practical terms, that approach would have created an unworkable constraint on the recovery of interest on costs, because it would, in effect, deprive the receiving party of any entitlement to interest wherever the authority in question was more than six years old. The consequences would be most acute in long‑running litigation in which interlocutory costs orders are made along the way, and in matters where detailed assessment proceedings are drawn out over time. It would, moreover, hand the paying party a powerful tactical incentive to try to...
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
