Legal News

Artificial Intelligence ( AI) is increasingly transforming the public sector, overhauling administrative routines and the way public policy is shaped. Although digital reform in government is long-standing—e‑governance and data‑driven decision‑making have evolved for decades—recent progress in machine learning ( ML), neural networks and predictive analytics has magnified the reach and effect of AI deployments. Public authorities now use AI to distribute social welfare, assist policing, steward healthcare resources, and improve transport systems, among other functions. Viewed through legal and policy lenses, these shifts raise issues concerning fundamental human rights, environmental impact ( AI carries high energy use), due process, privacy, and accountability, and also the reliability of AI outputs, which can propagate errors, misinformation or hallucinations, and embed bias or discrimination. This analysis examines the rules governing governmental AI and public policy, centring on the emerging provisions of Regulation ( EU) 2024/1689...

Shvidler v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs; Dalston Projects Ltd and others v Secretary of State for Transport [2025] UKSC 30 What are the practical implications of this case? These proceedings marked the inaugural judicial challenges to measures under the UK’s Russia sanctions framework, dramatically widened before and after Russia’s full‑scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Practitioners, and their clients, had long awaited the Supreme Court’s ruling to clarify how both the executive and the judiciary should handle such contests. The majority, by affording the executive an exceptionally broad margin of appreciation in decision‑making on foreign policy and national security, has in effect foreclosed any realistic route to contesting individual sanctions on proportionality grounds. Although a number of people have been de‑listed, the FCDO has not issued any policy or guidance explaining its approach to ministerial review...

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])......

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: Brexit highlights Post- Brexit transition guidance Constitutional and administrative law Judicial review Equality and human rights Public procurement Subsidy control and State aid Information law State security and intelligence Central government pensions 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 Brexit highlights Court of Appeal confirms pre-settled status does not confer residency rights under Withdrawal Agreement ( Fertré v Vale of White Horse District Council) In Fertré v Vale of White Horse District Council [2025] EWCA Civ 1057, the Court of Appeal ( Civil Division) dismissed the claimant’s appeal. Although she has pre-settled status ( PSS) under UK domestic law, that status does not generate residency rights under the...

Judge Timothy Parker upheld and confirmed the ban imposed by the English Blackball Pool Federation ( EBPF) on Harriet Haynes, stopping her from playing eight-ball pool for the women’s ‘ A’ team in Kent, in south-east England. He stated that the April 2025 Supreme Court decision—which found that transgender women are not protected as women for the purposes of discrimination under the Equality Act 2010—meant Haynes could pursue only gender reassignment discrimination, not sex discrimination. Yet there was no arguable case on gender reassignment discrimination because, as the Canterbury county court in Kent held, ‘there is no reasonable alternative way of achieving fair competition short of exclusion’. The county court completed hearing Haynes’ claim five days before the Supreme Court delivered its judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers [2025] IRLR 537. In the aftermath of that ruling, Parker...

Lawyers for three unnamed individuals and the Good Law Project contended that elements of the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s ( EHRC) guidance on which workplace toilets trans people may access are unlawful. Alex Goodman KC argued that, under workplace regulations on the provision of single-sex toilets, the terms men and women must be read as encompassing trans men and trans women. In a pre-action letter, the not-for-profit group and the individuals—a transgender woman, a transgender man and an intersex woman—stated in May that they intended to bring a legal challenge to the EHRC’s advice on using lavatories at work. They maintained that the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Equality Act 2010 does not extend to legislation governing the use of lavatories, which contains no definition of ‘man’ or ‘woman’. The group is seeking permission from Judge Jonathan Swift to pursue judicial review to...

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...

Original news Mr T ( CAS-45233- Y4G1)—17 March 2025 Summary The Pensions Ombudsman upheld a complaint concerning incorrect records and a lag in putting them right within the Scheme. The pension scheme took an exceptionally lengthy period to correct an erroneous record. The Pensions Ombudsman concluded this amounted to maladministration and, because of the drawn‑out delay, a £3,000 award was justified to acknowledge the exceptional distress and inconvenience experienced. This decision serves as a reminder that, in exceptional cases, the Pensions Ombudsman can grant awards exceeding £2,000 for exceptional distress and inconvenience, underscoring its willingness to recognise such impact. What were the facts? Mr T was a member of the Fee Paid Judicial Pension Scheme (the Scheme). Mr T received a benefit statement from the Scheme in question......

Brexit highlights The UN Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee has released draft conclusions that the UK breached Articles 3 and 8 during the development of the European Union ( Withdrawal) Bill, following a 2017 Friends of the Earth complaint. Required consultation timeframes were not met The draft Bill was not made available for public scrutiny Opportunities for public feedback were not provided If adopted by Convention member states in November 2025, these findings would be binding in international law and require the UK to introduce legislative changes to guarantee effective public participation in future environmental law-making. The government may choose to act on the recommendations ahead of the November 2025 meeting. See: LNB News 25/07/2025 10......

Britain’s highest court has granted the Foreign Office significant discretion by upholding sanctions on US- British billionaire Eugene Shvidler on 29 July 2025, a move that could pave the way for wider use of punitive financial measures. The justices’ view that officials should be ‘accorded a wide margin of appreciation’ in national security matters signals that courts will rarely unsettle sanctions listings, even when the underlying evidence appears unpersuasive. Syed Rahman, a partner at Rahman Ravelli, said the ruling will embolden ministers, while cautioning that there is an obvious danger the UK sanctions framework could become a tool of reputational penalty, lacking the checks and balances for which the legal system is known. Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the government has designated more than 1,800 individuals and entities. Yet this is the first judgment to address the lawfulness of...

Shvidler v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs; Dalston Projects Ltd and others v Secretary of State for Transport [2025] UKSC 30. Background The appeal raises significant issues about how the UK's sanctions framework functions, introduced to exert pressure on the Russian Federation to halt its brutal war on Ukraine. It further examines whether interferences with a designated individual’s or company’s Convention rights are proportionate. The two appellants, Mr Shvidler and Dalston Projects Ltd, were subjected to measures made under the powers in the Russia ( Sanctions) ( EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (the 2019 Regulations), SI 2019/855, as revised in 2022. Mr Shvidler’s designation occurred on 24 March 2022, one month after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The consequence was a worldwide asset freeze and the creation of a criminal offence for others who engage with him, whether privately or in...

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...

In this issue: Brexit highlights Brexit SIs Post- Brexit transition guidance Constitutional and administrative law Equality and human rights Judicial review Information law Public procurement Subsidy control and State aid Other Public Law news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Brexit highlights Cabinet Office publishes evaluation of Common Frameworks The Cabinet Office has released a review of the Common Frameworks, assessing how the UK Government and the devolved administrations collaborate after Brexit. Drawing on proforma data across 28 frameworks and six case studies, the review concluded that, although the frameworks support effective intergovernmental collaboration, there is scope to enhance cross-framework alignment, stakeholder participation and central guidance. It also observed that many processes within the frameworks remain untried, with limited examples of formal...

Although dependency on substances has for many years been acknowledged as a workplace issue needing careful management, the rapid advance of digital technology has pushed newer forms of dependency into the spotlight. According to a recent BUPA survey, more than half of UK workers have grappled with some kind of addiction. Behavioural addictions cover a broad span of compulsive behaviours, including the excessive use of digital technologies. Reports indicate that roughly one in eight adults in the UK is affected by a behavioural addiction. Examples can include gambling, gaming, heavy internet use, social media, pornography consumption, online shopping, or compulsive cryptocurrency trading. A notable by-product of the coronavirus ( COVID-19) lockdowns was a rise in these digital forms of addiction. Employers can find it hard to tackle the effect such addictions have on performance at work, particularly where roles include an element of remote...

Bradshaw and others v United Kingdom, Application no. 15653/22 Background In 2019 and 2020, the House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee, alongside Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee, issued reports addressing Russian meddling in the 2014 Scottish independence vote, the 2016 EU membership referendum, and the 2019 UK general election. While still serving as MPs at that time, the applicants were unsuccessful in formally seeking judicial review of the government’s refusal to order an independent inquiry, contending, among other grounds, that this contravened the investigative duty implicit in Article 3 of Protocol 1. Judgment The ECt HR concluded, unanimously, that Article 3 of Protocol 1 had not been breached whatsoever. Reasons for the judgment The ECt HR considered there to be no settled consensus about precisely what......

Department for Business and Trade ( Respondent) v The Information Commissioner ( Appellant) [2025] UKSC 27 Background FIA 2000 grants a right to access information held by public bodies, save where the Act’s exemptions apply. On 15 November 2017, journalist Mr Montague asked the Department of Business and Trade (‘the Department’) for material about the Trade Working Groups established to undertake preliminary work on post‑ Brexit trade agreements. The Department released some material on 8 February 2018 and added more on 25 March 2019 (while the Commissioner’s investigation was ongoing), but retained the rest, invoking FIA 2000, s 27, concerning international relations, and s 35(1)(a) concerning the development of government policy. Those provisions are ‘qualified exemptions’, as they are governed by the public interest balancing exercise in FIA 2000, s 2(2)(b), which states that ‘in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in...

R (on the application of ALR) v Chancellor of the Exchequer [2025] EWHC 1467 ( Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? Although much turns on the particular facts, four legal points have broader reach. First, the court granted the defendant a particularly wide latitude. Beyond its nature as social and economic policy, weight was placed on the aim of raising funds to support state education—regarded as a redistributive measure, engaging judgement rather than strict legal reasoning—and on the fact the step reflected a manifesto pledge and had been extensively debated in Parliament. Second, the court clarified what an ‘ab ante’ challenge means. Such a claim is brought before a measure takes effect; it is not simply a systemic (as opposed to individual) claim. Where a challenge is pursued ab ante, the court will not declare a provision...