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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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’s the issue? Established in 1971, the common law identification doctrine sets the benchmark for determining when the conduct and state of mind of an individual can be treated as those of a corporate person. It has historically been the principal mechanism by which criminal culpability is fastened onto companies. Under this approach, attribution only arises where the offence is committed by the corporation’s ‘directing mind and will’. In reality, this typically captured only the managing director or proprietor, provided they were directly engaged in running the business. Consequently, prosecutors have long faced a demanding threshold. Section 196 of ECCTA alters the landscape: where a senior manager, acting within the actual or ostensible scope of their authority, perpetrates a ‘relevant offence’, the organisation itself commits that offence. Practical implications for commercial organisations The practical upshot is that businesses are vulnerable to findings of primary economic crime, with...
But what happens when the criminal property is only a fraction of the sums held in an account? Case law has meant that, even where only a small portion of an account is tainted, the entire balance had to be frozen, an outcome widely seen as unfair. Parliament has now remedied this through the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 ( ECCTA 2023). Section 183 of the ECCTA 2023, ' Money laundering: exemptions for mixed-property transactions', took effect on 15 January 2024. It revises the POCA 2002 provisions that set out the principal money laundering offences. The change introduces an exemption for regulated firms that maintain a client account or hold client funds while knowing or suspecting that only part of the funds or property is criminal. In those circumstances, the regulated firm may carry out transactions on the account or property...
The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ( DSIT) and the National Cyber Security Centre ( NCSC) have opened a consultation on a new draft Cyber Governance Code of Practice intended to strengthen businesses’ cyber resilience. The proposed guidance aims to put cyber security at the forefront for businesses and sets out recommendations......
What impact do you consider the new Failure to Prevent fraud offence and expansion of corporate criminal liability for economic crimes will have for businesses and the lawyers advising them? The new Failure to Prevent ( FTP) fraud offence is intended to embed a culture of stronger fraud prevention within organisations, echoing the FTP bribery regime. Set out in section 199 of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 ( ECCTA 2023), it applies to ‘relevant bodies’ where an ‘associate’ commits fraud to benefit the relevant body or ‘any person to whom, or to whose subsidiary undertaking, the associate provides services on behalf of the relevant body’... The scope surpasses section 7 of the Bribery Act 2010 ( BA 2010). Those automatically treated as ‘associates’ include employees, agents and subsidiaries; this also covers employees of subsidiaries and any individual performing services for or on the...
The Serious Fraud Office ( SFO) From 15 January 2024, the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 confers fresh powers on the SFO, enabling it to require suspected fraudsters and businesses to provide material relevant to enquiries. Before this shift, the agency could obtain corporate evidence without launching a formal investigation in overseas bribery and corruption matters. The reforms now broaden that ability, applying it to fraud, as well as to domestic bribery and corruption cases......
Risk & Compliance weekly highlights—18 January 2024 In this issue: Risk & Compliance forecast as at 16 January 2024 Data protection AML, CTF & counter-proliferation financing Cybersecurity Question of the week Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Risk & Compliance forecast as at 16 January 2024 Our latest Risk and Compliance forecast (as at 16 January 2024) is now available. This month we cover: (1) developments on the EU directive concerning corporate sustainability due diligence; (2) the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill reaching its second reading; (3) an LSB review into the circumstances preceding the SRA’s Axiom Ince intervention; and (4) a fresh ICO consultation on generative artificial intelligence ( AI). See News Analysis: Risk and Compliance forecast as at 16 January 2024. Data protection ICO fines home improvement companies £250,000 for breaching PECR 2003 The...
De minimis non curat lex translates as ‘the law does not trouble itself with trifles’. Yet the Bribery Act 2010 ( BA 2010) suggests otherwise, clearly. Commencing on 1 July 2011, BA 2010 overhauled and superseded antiquated bribery and corruption statutes. It answered criticism of the UK framework from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ( OECD). The Act signals the government’s uncompromising stance on bribery in UK commerce. Though concise—only 20 sections and two schedules—it reaches broadly across jurisdictions, establishes wide-ranging criminal prohibitions, and captures both individuals and companies operating in private and public spheres. Its effect spans both private enterprise and public administration. Matthew Vernon of Osborne Clarke explores the principal issues and risks for businesses around corporate hospitality and gifting, and outlines what organisations can anticipate from the Serious Fraud Office ( SFO). Its scope is wide, with effect across...
European Data Act enters into force, putting in place new rules for a fair and innovative data economy Today, the European Data Act takes effect. The framework sets out who may access and use data produced within the EU across all sectors of the economy, and will simplify sharing, notably of industrial data. The Act brings greater fairness to the digital ecosystem by spelling out who is entitled to derive value from data and under what terms. By clarifying roles and benefits, it sets fair conditions for value creation EU-wide. It will also boost a dynamic, innovative data marketplace by opening up industrial data and offering legal certainty on data use. Margrethe Vestager, Executive Vice- President for a Europe fit for the Digital Age, said: ‘ This is a significant step on our path to digital transformation. With clear rules on data, we give users...
Enforcement against Google over its use of location data proposed by the Irish data protection authority has been subject to objections by other EU watchdogs Plans by Ireland’s data protection authority to take enforcement action over Google’s use of location data have met with objections raised by other EU regulators. In October 2023, the Irish DPC shared a provisional decision with fellow EU data authorities for review, in line with the procedure used for cross-border GDPR cases. Helen Dixon, the head of the Irish watchdog, told MLex today that a total of four objections had been filed against that draft......
SRA’s £500k fine on Clyde & Co is sign of things to come Clyde & Co has been hit with a £500,000 sanction by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal ( SDT) for failing to satisfy itself that a client was not engaged in money laundering — the heaviest penalty to date for an anti-money laundering ( AML) lapse. An SRA spokesperson told Law360 on 12 January 2024 that neither the regulator nor the SDT, which deals with the gravest matters, has ever imposed a larger financial penalty, whether for AML breaches or any other misconduct. ‘ Both the SRA and SDT are starting to apply more substantial fines and this signals what lies ahead,’ said Rebecca Atkinson, general counsel and compliance officer for legal practice at Howard Kennedy LLP, speaking to Law360. The tribunal has only once before reached the £500,000 mark: in 2017, when Locke Lord LLP...
In this issue: Data protection Financial sanctions AML, CTF and counter-proliferation financing Other financial crime Other Risk & Compliance updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Data protection MLex reports that the UK’s post‑ Brexit push to reshape its data protection regime is running into “choppy waters” in Parliament, a lawmaker has cautioned, while the country’s chief privacy regulator has aired concerns about proportionality. See News Analysis: UK data reform faces choppy waters from lawmakers over EU data adequacy, online safety. The Court of Justice of the European Union ( Third Chamber) has confirmed, in case C‑667/21, ZQ v Medizinischer Dienst der Krankenversicherung Nordrhein, Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts, that Article 82 of Regulation ( EU) 2016/679 ( EU GDPR) has a compensatory aim. Awards under Article 82 must deliver full and effective...
Baines contended that Mail Online—ranked the UK’s third most visited news site and fifth globally by trade outlet Press Gazette—was breaching privacy laws. Rather than offering a ‘reject all’ option, its banner presents a ‘got it’ button that signifies consent to cookies, alongside a ‘cookie settings’ control to amend cookie preferences. The complaint referenced multiple remarks from ICO officials about cookie banners, among them a June interview deputy commissioner Stephen Bonner granted to MLex. Following a freedom of information request, the ICO released that interview. According to MLex, the ICO has now refused to open an investigation into the matter. In a letter to Baines dated 14 November 2023, the ICO stated that it had passed on the information concerned......
Agile enforcement When the UK Information Commissioner’s Office ( ICO) served Snap with a preliminary enforcement notice on 6 October 2023, potentially forcing its AI chatbot off the UK market, it illustrated the regulator’s renewed focus on ‘agile’ enforcement (see: LNB News 06/10/2023 31). Edwards said it is a capability they must become more comfortable exercising. He noted the Snap action mattered because issues were spotted in March, when the product first went live. The ICO asked questions, formed a team and accelerated the process. In the past, reaching that stage might have taken three to four years. This time, the authority arrived there in around six months, reflecting what Edwards called a ‘culture change’ that will let the ICO apply a wider spectrum of responses to data protection concerns. In some scenarios, such as Snap’s ‘ My AI’ chatbot, it enables faster...
France’s Data Protection Authority ( CNIL) imposed €600,000 penalty on Groupe Canal+, publisher of channels and distributor of pay-television services, for infringing Articles 12, 13, 14, 15, 21, 28, 32 and 33 of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation ( EU) 2016/679 ( EU......
What are the key provisions of The Russia ( Sanctions) ( EU Exit) ( Amendment) ( No 3) Regulations 2023? The Russia ( Sanctions) ( EU Exit) ( Amendment) ( No 3) Regulations 2023, SI 2023/713, revise the Russia ( Sanctions) ( EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2009/855 (the Russia Regulations). Since September 2022, the UK has sought to sever Russia’s access to a range of professional services, and these latest steps reinforce the sanctions introduced over the past year. The updated trade measures prohibit any person from directly or indirectly supplying “legal advisory services” to a non- UK person where the advice relates to, or is connected with, conduct that would be prohibited by the Russia Regulations if carried out by a UK person or within the UK. In effect, UK lawyers are barred from advising Russian businesses on certain...
Berlin’s Data Protection Authority ( DPA) has imposed a €300,000 penalty on a Berlin-based bank for three breaches of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation ( EU) 2016/679......
The Information Commissioner’s Office ( ICO) imposed a £12.7m penalty on Tik Tok Information Technologies UK Limited and Tik Tok Inc ( Tik Tok) for violations of the UK’s General Data Protection Regulation, Retained Regulation ( EU) 2016/679 ( UK GDPR), including not handling children’s personal data lawfully. The ICO estimates in 2020 Tik Tok permitted up to 1.4m UK children under......
The United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation, Retained Regulation ( EU) 2016/679, and the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ( FIA 2000) oblige public and private bodies to reply to subject access requests within one to three months when people seek details of the personal data those organisations hold about them. Yet, on 28 September 2022, the ICO announced that an investigation had found Virgin Media, the Ministry of Defence, the Home Office, the London Borough of Croydon, Kent Police, the London Borough of Hackney and the London Borough of Lambeth had 'repeatedly failed' to meet this statutory deadline. Following these conclusions, the regulator issued reprimands to all seven organisations and, under the FIA 2000, practice recommendations to two of the London boroughs. The agency added that these bodies have three to six months to make improvements or 'further...
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
