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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
In this issue: Reputation management New technologies Internet Data protection Media Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Telecommunications Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Reputation management High Court discharges super-injunction in Afghan data breach case ( Ministry of Defence v Global Media and Entertainment Ltd) In Ministry of Defence v Global Media and Entertainment Ltd [2025] EWHC 1806 ( Admin), the High Court lifted a super-injunction, a notable juncture where privacy, national security and open justice intersect. The ruling resets the balance between state secrecy and the public’s entitlement to be informed, underscoring the need for democratic accountability when handling sensitive governmental mistakes. By making the ruling public—together with the earlier judgments in the matter—the court signals the limits of...
The Commission has issued its ‘ Guidelines on the scope of obligations for general‑purpose AI models’. Though not legally binding, they explain how the Commission reads and applies Regulation ( EU) 2024/1689 (the EU AI Act), which will underpin its enforcement practice and thus offer significant practical clarity. They succeed a prior draft circulated in April 2025 for consultation (see: LNB News 18/07/2025 40 and LNB News 22/04/2025 37). The final text concentrates on four central and closely linked themes: defining GPAI models, what counts as a provider placing a GPAI model on the market, the open‑source exemptions to the obligations for GPAI models, and certain considerations on the enforcement of the GPAI model framework. What is a GPAI model? The guidelines set out three key elements about GPAI models: an indicative benchmark for when a model qualifies as a GPAI model, how the...
What are the practical implications of this case? The Court of Appeal’s ruling has significant practical consequences for IP enforcement in AI model training, and more generally for the conduct of litigation. Above all, it emphasises the need for precision in pleadings. The court confirmed that claimants must set out, at the earliest stage, every element of their case with clarity. In this dispute, Getty did not exercise the requisite care when advancing its reputational harm claims. Attempts to introduce fresh allegations or further evidence during later phases of the trial can properly be refused, irrespective of apparent relevance or seriousness. For AI technology developers, this ruling—and the proceedings as a whole—serve as a clear warning about the legal risks linked to large‑scale data scraping, and the use of copyright‑protected and trade marked material for model training......
Competition Appeal Tribunal grants group litigation orders The Competition Appeal Tribunal has approved group litigation orders for a £2.7bn action led by University of East Anglia scholar Andreas Stephan and a separate £1.3bn claim led by consumer campaigner Robert Hammond. In its written ruling, the panel rejected Amazon’s contention that defects in funding structures and in the loss-assessment methodologies adopted by the two class representatives barred the proceedings. It also dismissed Amazon’s assertion that the returns due to the litigation funder supporting Hammond were 'wildly excessive' and 'indefensibly high'. The tribunal further held that Stephan’s approach offered an 'adequate, initial blueprint to trial', and that shortcomings identified in Hammond’s model could be addressed by drawing on overlapping elements of the academic’s methodology. Accordingly, the decision states: ' We find that the Hammond action, on the basis that it will be heard together with the...
In this issue: New technologies Internet Media Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Telecommunications Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information New technologies Commission issues guidelines on EU AI Act obligations for general-purpose AI models On 18 July 2025, the European Commission issued guidelines clarifying how obligations apply to providers of GPAI models under the EU AI Act. Published in advance of the GPAI model rules taking effect on 2 August 2025, they are intended to spell out in detail what providers must do under the law. While not legally binding, the guidelines reflect the Commission’s reading and intended application of the Act, which will inform its enforcement approach. They also sit alongside the General- Purpose AI Code of Practice that independent experts submitted to the Commission on 10 July. See News Analysis: AI developers, users see EU’s guidelines on general-purpose AI models and LNB News...
On 21 July 2025, the Science Minister, Patrick Vallance, signalled that the UK may prepare wide-ranging legislation for artificial intelligence, the latest sign of a change in stance from depending on existing authorities to oversee how these technologies are applied within their respective sectors. Addressing the House of Lords, he explained that the UK had followed a course distinct from the EU AI Act, in this area, ‘but we are now......
The conclusive edition of the General- Purpose AI ( GPAI) Code of Practice appeared on 10 July 2025. It succeeds three prior drafts, issued in November 2024, December 2024, and March 2025. Pending scrutiny and validation by the European Commission and Member States, the 10 July text is treated as definitive in advance of the GPAI provisions of Regulation ( EU) 2024/1689 (the EU AI Act) taking effect on 2 August 2025. Commission guidance clarifying key notions linked to GPAI models, released on 18 July 2025, sits alongside the Code of Practice as an accompaniment. This Code is a voluntary instrument, supported by the EU AI Office and produced by a consortium of academics and industry participants, intended to assist GPAI model providers in fulfilling the corresponding obligations of the EU AI Act (see: LNB News 18/07/2025 40, LNB News...
A cohort of members within NDP Nieuwsmedia, the national trade association representing 95% of the Dutch commercial news sector, will voluntarily pool together their editorial content so they can bargain together collectively with AI developers. The consortium has concluded its first licensing deal with GPT- NL, an open, publicly funded large language model. GPT- NL already holds an agreement with the Dutch judiciary to......
On 18 July 2025, the Commission issued administrative guidance on the EU AI Act’s rules for GPAI models, designed to clarify scope, core concepts and how these interact with a related code of practice. The guidance sets out key legal terms to map the reach of the EU AI Act’s global partnership and artificial intelligence ( GPAI) regime and pinpoint which businesses must comply. An initial draft was released in April 2025 to gather views from stakeholders. Following that consultation, the Commission’s AI Office outlined the principal revisions to EU Member States at a European AI Board meeting in late June 2025. The GPAI provisions will apply from 2 August 2025... Definition of GPAI models The guidance introduces a quantitative test to determine whether a model qualifies as a GPAI model—and is therefore within the AI Act’s remit—based on the computing power used for...
Under new guidance from the Commission pursuant to the EU DSA, online service providers must implement age-assurance measures that are proportionate to the level of risk their services present to minors. In parallel with the guidance, the Commission has introduced a prototype age-verification app that confirms whether a user is over 18 before accessing adult content, without exposing personal information such as precise age or identity. The recommendations centre on four areas: addictive design cyberbullying harmful content unwanted contact from strangers Although not exhaustive, a Commission official indicated they set a demanding bar for compliance. The official emphasised these are practical recommendations for all platforms, not just Very Large Online Platforms ( VLOPs), intended to steer providers of every size in addressing the harms and risks their services may pose to minors. See: LNB News 25/06/2025 2, LNB News...
Both organisations said the amended claim introduced fresh and additional accusations and widened the overall breadth of the authors’ case and claims, and Open AI contended that whereas the authors had previously asserted only that infringement arose from their works being fed into Open AI’s large language model, they now contend that Chat GPT’s outputs also ground infringement. In a motion to dismiss dated 14 July 2025, Open AI said the authors’ theory had ‘radically changed’ and that they had walked back earlier statements to the court indicating a primary focus on the input side of the process. ‘ Plaintiffs allege that even outputs comprising “summaries” of text “are themselves derivative works, ineluctably based on original unlawful copied work”,’ the filing stated. ‘ But the accusations concerning outputs effectively stop there. The complaint does not attach or even quote a single sentence from any...
In this issue: New technologies Information technology Internet Data protection Media Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Telecommunications Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information New technologies MLex: Open AI, Microsoft, Google and other major AI players noted today’s release of the EU AI Act’s code of practice for general‑purpose AI models, yet accompanying guidance and a data disclosure template are still outstanding, leaving uncertainty over whether providers will commit without the complete picture. With guidance and the template still awaited, it is unclear if firms will sign up before seeing the entire package. The European Commission is informally considering a grace period to ease early compliance, though timeframe has not yet been determined and confirmation is pending. A handful of last‑minute edits also entered the concluding text, yielding mixed outcomes on a pivotal copyright element. See: AI developers view the final iteration of the EU code of...
DUAA 2025 secured Royal Assent on 19 June 2025, bringing it into law in the UK after being approved by Parliament on 11 June 2025. The Act primarily revises Assimilated Regulation ( EU) 2016/679, the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation (the UK GDPR), and PECR 2003. This article centres on the updates DUAA 2025 makes to PECR 2003—the UK rules that oversee the use of cookies and other online tracking tools—as well as the requirements relating to electronic marketing communications......
Open AI, Microsoft and Google were among leading AI firms as the European Union unveiled the final version of the EU AI Act’s code of practice for general‑purpose AI models today, even though significant compliance concerns remain unsettled. The code had been slated to appear alongside two other pivotal papers: guidance to clarify core concepts (including what counts as a general‑purpose AI, or GPAI, model) and a template requiring model providers to disclose training data. Those guidance and template documents are still subject to internal scrutiny by the European Commission, with no publication date confirmed. While the guidance could emerge as soon as next week, the template may not be ready before the GPAI rules start applying on 2 August 2025, MLex understands. It is also unclear whether AI companies will sign up to the code before seeing the template, as the...
In this issue: New technologies Internet Data protection Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Telecommunications Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information New technologies AI and Copyright–where are we now? TMT analysis: ‘ Right now, how UK copyright rules apply to training AI systems remains contested’. Framed at the outset of the government’s December 2024 consultation on Copyright and AI, this line barely conveys the intensity of opinion and the frictions now visible between technology and creative sectors. Suggested fixes tabled for the Data ( Use and Access) Act 2025 ( DUAA 2025) failed to survive into the enacted text, leaving unresolved how the UK will reconcile the clashing priorities of two influential camps presently at odds. Authored by Aaron Cole and Patricia Wade, Ashurst LLP. See News...
The ruling permits the case to move forward to a hearing on the substantive issues and key questions surrounding allegations of unlawful handling of children’s data, although no date has yet been fixed. The Information Commissioner’s Office ( ICO) is contesting a court’s decision to overturn Tik Tok’s 2023 penalty. Tik Tok contended that, as its platform fosters artistic expression, the use of personal data, including that of under-13 users, fell......
Europe is approaching a watershed in the evolving relationship between artificial intelligence and copyright law. For the first time, the Court of Justice has been invited to determine how copyright norms apply to generative AI systems, an essential move for steering innovation and safeguarding content across Europe, marking a crucial test case for Europe. Context The applicant, Like Company, is a Hungarian press publisher overseeing multiple online news sites that host protected works. It alleges that Google’s chatbot, Gemini (formerly Bard), powered by large language models ( LLMs), reproduces and condenses large parts of its articles without prior authorisation. According to Like Company, Gemini produced replies mirroring notable segments of its originals, thereby violating its exclusive rights. On 3 April 2025, the Budapest Környéki Törvényszék ( Budapest District Court) referred Like Company v Google Ireland ( Case C-250/25) to the Court of Justice, posing the first...
In this issue: New technologies Internet Media Advertising, marketing and sponsorship Lex Talk®TMT: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q& As Useful information New technologies Getty Images drops Stability AI copyright infringement claims from UK trial MLex reports that on 25 June 2025 Getty Images abandoned its direct copyright infringement claims against image generator Stability AI during the first day of closing submissions in a landmark three‑week High Court hearing in London. It is still pursuing allegations of trade mark infringement, passing off, secondary copyright infringement and issues around licensing, yet the move is a setback for the UK’s creative sector, which had sought clear precedent to provide broad copyright protection in the UK against AI models’ web scraping. See: Getty Images drops Stability AI copyright infringement claims from UK trial. IAB Tech Lab proposes framework for AI content usage compensation and brand...
Directive 2006/115/ EC and equitable remuneration At the High Court, the UK Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology contended that SAG- AFTRA, the American Federation of Musicians, and representatives of members lacked a personal cause of action, arguing they were not within the class of persons the EU directives underpinning their claims were meant to protect. The organisations commenced proceedings against the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology in April 2023. They alleged that the UK’s transposition of Directive 2006/115/ EC — the EU Rental and Lending Rights Directive — which concerns rights related to copyright, particularly broadcasting and communication to the public, was defective and afforded only limited rights to equitable remuneration. The unions further asserted that the UK government had breached Article 8(2) of Directive 2006/115/ EC, which stipulates that ‘equitable remuneration’ must be paid to...
On 25 June 2025, junior minister for AI and the digital economy, Feryal Clark, was questioned by MPs in Parliament about the Online Safety Act 2023, following her earlier comment that Ofcom’s codes of practice on illegal harms must be ‘proofed against judicial review’. Alan Mak MP, the Conservative opposition’s science spokesman, pressed her on whether this signalled that the Labour administration was placing legal defensibility ahead of swift safeguards for children online. Clark replied that the statute had been framed and enacted under the previous Conservative government, which ceded office to Labour a year earlier, and that it had been subject to delays and revisions that shaped its current form. She contended that it was his party that stalled and diluted the legislation, while ministers are now focused on delivering the Bill as outlined in the guidance....
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
