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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
What is the background to the consultation? On 13 October 2025, Alison Mc Govern, Minister of State for Local Government and Homelessness, told the House of Commons that the government was formally opening a consultation on proposed policy changes to the LGPS in England and Wales. This exercise follows major updates to the scheme’s investment and governance framework and rules that were announced earlier this year. What is being proposed and why? Within the consultation, four core policy themes are being examined in detail at present. First, the NMPA. Under the Finance Act 2022, the NMPA for the majority of registered pension schemes is scheduled to rise from age 55 to age 57, taking effect from 6 April 2028......
R (on the application of SK) v Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead (transcript) [2025] EWHC 2186 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The application concerned interim relief and whether SK had shown a strong arguable case. The distressing background appears highly atypical. Consequently, the practical ramifications are likely to be limited. Even so, the ruling offers persuasive guidance on the character of the main housing duty under HA 1996, s 193(2), and on whether accommodation can become unsuitable because of a temporary alteration in the applicant’s household circumstances. Judicial review is a last-resort remedy; a claimant will not be permitted to bring judicial review where an adequate alternative remedy is available, save in exceptional situations. This judgment might be taken to demonstrate how hard it is to establish such exceptional circumstances. As the judge...
R ( Bates) v Highbury Corner Magistrates' Court [2025] EWHC 2532 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling reiterates that the High Court retains a discretion to issue inter partes costs orders in criminal appeals. Under the Murphy principle, such orders were thought unavailable, meaning successful parties in judicial review were unable to recoup their expenditure, even where the prosecution was abusive, vexatious, or lacked merit. Practitioners and clients should now be alive to the prospect of substantial adverse costs if a private prosecution is found to be abusive. Here, the High Court censured the private prosecutor for breaching the duty of candour and withholding material information—failings that directly informed the decision to grant a costs order. The judgment also bolsters defendants: rather than having to rely on the seldom‑met threshold of ‘exceptional...
In this issue: Brexit SIs Constitutional and administrative law State security and intelligence Judicial review Equality and human rights Public procurement Information law State accountability and liability Projects and infrastructure Other public law news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Brexit SIs Global Irregular Migration and Trafficking in Persons Sanctions ( Overseas Territories) Order 2025 SI 2025/1092: This Order extends, with modifications, the Global Irregular Migration and Trafficking in Persons Sanctions Regulations 2025 ( SI 2025/902), as amended from time to time, to all British overseas territories bar Bermuda and Gibraltar, which implement sanctions via their own legislative amendments. It took effect on 16 October 2025. See: LNB News 17/10/2025 11. Vehicle Emissions Trading Schemes (...
The Equality and Human Rights Commission ( EHRC) has advised Bridget Phillipson, the Minister for Women and Equalities, that organisations still use 2011 guidance to interpret the Equality Act 2010 ( Eq A 2010) which is outdated and now deemed unlawful, rather than the Commission’s new advice sent to Phillipson six weeks ago, the watchdog said. The EHRC’s revision sets out relevant case law on disability, the threshold for a legally protected philosophical belief, and changes flowing from the Supreme Court’s judgment in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16 about the definition of sex. Baroness Kishwer Falkner, the EHRC’s chair, pressed Phillipson to withdraw the obsolete guidance and to present the draft update to Parliament for parliament to consider......
Watson v Chief Constable of Humberside Police [2025] EWHC 2544 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision addresses who bears the burden of proof in claims for false imprisonment and assault, and underscores that any detention or use of force by police must be justified by the rationale an officer advances for acting as they did at the material time. It illustrates that disputes should be resolved on the pleaded issues and the evidence tested in court, and not beyond them. Positions resting on a narrative the court rejects will rarely withstand judicial examination, and judges ought not determine matters on hypothetical versions of a party’s case or on speculation. What was the background? The claimant, experiencing several physical frailties and impairments, made an emergency call saying he might cut his own throat owing to the distress he was...
In this issue: Brexit highlights Brexit SIs Judicial review Constitutional and administrative law Equality and human rights Public procurement State aid and subsidy control State accountability and liability Information law Management and strategic planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Brexit highlights Lords Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee calls for urgent Windsor Framework reforms Parliament’s Lords Northern Ireland Scrutiny Committee has issued its first report of the session, judging the Windsor Framework in its current form to be excessively complex and unworkable for stakeholders, and finding that attempts to tackle Northern Ireland’s post‑ Brexit democratic deficit remain inadequate. The Committee puts forward 88 recommendations pressing for rapid measures to reinforce Northern Ireland’s role in the reset of UK‑ EU relations, including streamlining institutional structures, creating a new Cabinet Office unit to monitor regulatory divergence, and delivering a single ‘one stop shop’ for businesses to access EU law material. It also advises...
Original news Mr T ( CAS-76722- Z3Z9)—19 June 2025 Summary The Deputy Pensions Ombudsman upheld a grievance concerning a retained firefighter’s right to move all pensionable service into a newer, more generous arrangement created after a court ruled retained firefighters had been discriminated against. Taking a pragmatic stance, the Deputy Pensions Ombudsman construed a rule, brought in via secondary legislation, that permits the transfer of pensionable service. That secondary instrument, which implemented the provisions, should be read, so far as achievable, to realise the legislative purpose of eliminating the discrimination faced by retained firefighters. The decision illustrates how the Pensions Ombudsman will approach statutory interpretation. What were the facts? Retained firefighters were initially barred from joining the principal Firefighters’ Pension Scheme 1992 (the 1992 Scheme). After a legal challenge, this exclusion was held to be discriminatory towards part‑time staff. Consequently, the New...
R ( D1914 and AAA) v Secretary of State for the Home Department ( Speaker of The House of Commons, intervening); R ( AVY) v Secretary of State for the Home Department ( Speaker of The House of Commons, intervening) [2025] EWHC 1853 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling clarifies the limits on the Administrative Court and on claimants seeking to contest the implementation of recommendations arising from a statutory inquiry. It confirms that the constitutional separation of powers prevents the High Court from serving as a ‘second inquiry’ to assess the sufficiency of governmental responses to statutory inquiries. The judgment also sets out clear practice points for judicial review challenges concerning immigration detainees: Standing is crucial: there must be a direct link to the particular facility under challenge—here, Brook House—and general detention elsewhere in the...
In this issue: Brexit headlines Equality and human rights State security and intelligence Judicial review Public sector contracts Public procurement State aid and subsidy control Information law Other public law news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Brexit headlines Cabinet Office issues joint update on Windsor Framework delivery — The Cabinet Office released a joint statement from the UK government and the European Commission after the 2 October 2025 meeting of the Specialised Committee on the Implementation of the Windsor Framework. The co-chairs reported progress since 10 June 2025, while noting that major work is still needed to put in place safeguards that enable flexible movement of goods between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. See: LNB News...
The Commercial Court ruled PPE Medpro Ltd broke a procurement agreement by supplying the Department of Health and Social Care with surgical gowns that were not sterilised. Mrs Justice Cockerill dismissed Medpro’s argument that both sides had accepted documentation which, though falling short of the statutory sterilisation criteria for personal protective equipment, still evidenced compliance. Cockerill J said: “ That reading did not align with the contractual papers on which Medpro relied, and it lacked commercial logic.” She added: “ Accordingly, contrary to Medpro’s position, a validated sterilisation process had to be shown.” The firm was routed into the government’s ‘ VIP Lane’ following alleged lobbying by Baroness Mone, a Conservative member of the House of Lords linked to the company. Although Baroness Mone denied involvement with Medpro, she later acknowledged she stood to gain financially from it. After it secured...
Public Office ( Accountability) Bill What are the overall principal goals and intended purposes of the put forward Public Office ( Accountability) Bill legislation?......
In this issue: Public Law case law quarterly— Q3 2025 Equality and Human rights Constitutional and administrative law Brexit SIs Post- Brexit transition guidance Judicial review Public procurement Public sector contracts State security and intelligence Information law Other Public law news Lex Talk®Public Law: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Public Law case law quarterly— Q3 2025 The quarterly Public Law case law round-up presents and evaluates significant judgments brought together by the Lexis+® UK Public Law team each quarter. Marking 25 years since the Human Rights Act 1998 took effect, this edition begins with insight into recent human rights jurisprudence. See News Analysis: Public Law case law quarterly— Q3 2025. Equality and Human rights ECt HR rejects prisoner voting claim— Hora v UK In Hora v United Kingdom ( Application no 1048/20), the European Court of Human Rights ( ECt HR) unanimously determined that the continued removal of voting rights from a...
Editor’s note Welcome to the third issue of the Public Law case law quarterly for 2025, spanning the third quarter of the year. Marking 25 years to the day since the Human Rights Act 1998 came into effect, we open with close scrutiny of recent human rights case law and closely connected considerations, starting with the Supreme Court’s judgment in Shvidler v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs. In that appeal, the Court ultimately rejected claims brought by individuals and companies challenging the UK’s post‑ Brexit sanctions framework as a disproportionate interference with their rights. The ruling carries significant consequences for future judicial review of executive measures adopted for foreign policy and security purposes, and is essential reading for practitioners across sanctions, constitutional and human rights law. This edition also covers the Supreme Court’s judgment in Department for Business and Trade v...
Ministry of Justice ( Mo J) On 30 September 2025, the Ministry of Justice ( Mo J) revealed it had found at least 500 cases where the appropriate level of pension contributions was not collected from members of the judiciary. It has begun a consultation on new regulations that would permit it to recover the unpaid sums, either via a lump-sum payment or by making further deductions from salary or pension income. In its consultation statement, it said the amendments are intended to expand the range of powers available to the Ministry of Justice to obtain pension contributions from members of the judicial pension schemes. The mistakes arose when either a judicial office-holder was not correctly enrolled into the judicial pension scheme, or when a cap on pensionable earnings was applied incorrectly to a member of the scheme......
Wikimedia Foundation (a charitable foundation registered in the United States of America) and another v Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology [2025] EWHC 2086 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The court accepted Wikimedia’s submissions that Wikipedia (the online encyclopaedia it hosts) makes an important contribution to free speech and expression, and that any decision seriously restricting Wikipedia’s ability to function would probably be unlawful for conflicting with the HRA 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights ( ECHR). A major flaw in Wikimedia’s case, however, was that Ofcom has not yet decided whether Wikipedia qualifies as a Category 1 service; Wikimedia advanced its challenge on the assumption it would be so designated, an assumption the court rejected. Consequently, the claim failed on both grounds alleging breaches of the HRA 1998 and the ECHR, because Wikimedia could not...
In this issue: Brexit highlights Brexit SIs Post- Brexit transition guidance Equality and Human rights Constitutional and administrative law Public procurement Information law Subsidy control and State aid Management and strategic planning Other public law news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Brexit highlights Administrative Court requests Court of Justice preliminary ruling under UK- EU Withdrawal Agreement in universal credit and domestic violence case— R ( BZ) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions The judgment focused on whether the Court should seek a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice under Article 158(1) of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the EU and the European Atomic Energy...
Hora v United Kingdom ( Application no 1048/20) Background In 2007, Michael Hora was found guilty of two rapes and a sexual assault; he had earlier, in 2000, received a rape conviction. The court imposed an indeterminate sentence for public protection, setting a minimum tariff of four years. Although that tariff ended in 2011, he remains in custody, the Parole Board having declined to order his release (para 5 of the judgment). At the general election on 12 December 2019, section 3 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 prevented him from voting; that provision excludes convicted prisoners serving custodial terms from the franchise (paras 6, 27). He brought a complaint in Strasbourg, asserting that this breached his right to free elections under Article 3 of Protocol No 1, relying on Hirst v UK ( No 2) and subsequent...
The Transport Committee and the SLSC reviewed the following proposed negative SI and made no suggestion to upgrade yet: The Merchant Shipping ( Maritime Labour Convention and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2025 Latest Commons select committee recommendations See the most recent report issued by the Transport Committee below: Votes and Proceedings, 16 September 2025 — Select Committees: Reports, Transport Committee Latest SLSC recommendations The latest SLSC report is: SLSC—36th Report of Session 2024–26 Sifting process for proposed negative procedure SIs introduced under REUL( RR) A 2023 REUL( RR) A 2023 provides a suite of delegated powers enabling the government and the devolved administrations to lay SIs to reshape REUL and assimilated legislation......
Summary The Deputy Pensions Ombudsman dismissed a complaint concerning entitlement to benefits. The Scheme had paid a contributions equivalent premium for one spell of employment, and it was implausible that a refund of the member’s contributions was not processed at the same time. Regarding a different employment period, there was no proof that the complainant was an active participant in the Scheme; this was consistent with him paying standard National Insurance contributions rather than the reduced rate ordinarily associated with membership of a contracted-out arrangement. The decision serves as a reminder that the burden rests with the individual to evidence scheme membership. What were the facts? Mr Y was a member of the NHS Pension Scheme (the Scheme). The Scheme was operated on a contracted-out basis......
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
