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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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: Corporate governance Environmental, social and governance issues Directors Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Corporate governance FRC publishes report to support transition to UK Stewardship Code 2026 The Financial Reporting Council ( FRC) has issued ‘ Preparing for the UK Stewardship Code 2026: Applying insights from current reporting’ to support signatories as they move to the refreshed Code, which comes into force on 1 January 2026. The publication offers pragmatic guidance and examples of high-quality disclosures to help asset owners, asset managers and service providers align with the Code’s simplified reporting framework. Under the 2026 Code, a dual reporting approach applies: a Policy and Context Disclosure must be lodged every four years, complemented by an annual Activities and Outcomes Report showing how the...
In this issue: UK private actions UK subsidy control EU antitrust EU competition policy Daily and weekly news alerts Caselex CAT issues judgment on allocation of undistributed damages following settlement in alleged rail ticket overcharge damages claim The CAT has delivered its ruling in Justin Gutmann v First MTR South Western Trains Limited and Another, addressing how to allocate undistributed damages left after a settlement. Brought by Mr Justin Gutmann as the Class Representative ( CR) under section 47 of the Competition Act 1998, the claim alleged an abuse of dominance by Stagecoach South Western Trains Limited ( SSWT) for not making ‘boundary fares’ sufficiently available to travelcard holders. Background In 2019, Mr Gutmann applied to commence opt-out collective proceedings under section 47B CA 1998 against First MTR and SSWT, which had operated the South Western rail franchise at...
In this issue: Planning enforcement Planning applications and decisions Waste planning Planning for nationally significant infrastructure Planning appeals Heritage and natural environment Planning policy Marine planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content New Q& As Related Documents Planning enforcement Essex hotel can continue housing asylum seekers as High Court rules injunction not justified ( Epping Forest District Council v Somani Hotels) In Epping Forest District Council v Somani Hotels Ltd [2025] EWHC 2937 ( KB), the High Court declined to issue a final injunction to stop the Bell Hotel being used to accommodate asylum seekers, deciding that reliance on section 187B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 ( TCPA 1990) would not be fair or proportionate. While the authority could sensibly allege a breach of planning control, the judge...
In this issue: Confidential information Medical devices Pharmaceuticals—regulatory framework Research and development Commercialisation Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers Useful information Confidential information Company Director held personally liable for misuse of confidential information ( Kieran Corrigan v One E Group) This High Court ruling followed a claim for misuse of confidential information against a company and three of its directors. At first instance, the court found the company and two directors liable, while the remaining director, Mr Timol, was not. Owing to late disclosure of pertinent documents, the Court of Appeal directed a re‑trial of the claim against Mr Timol. At the re‑trial, he was held personally responsible for breach of confidence. The court determined that, having obtained confidential material in circumstances creating a duty of confidence, any subsequent misuse breached that duty, even if he was...
What are the practical implications of this case? Inter Digital Inc and other companies v Optis Cellular Technology LLC and others [2025] EWCA Civ 1263 delivers clear direction for those engaged in patent litigation, extending to third parties with a stake in confidential material at issue. Notably, it was the non-parties—rather than Apple and Optis—who sought permission to appeal the High Court decision. The court’s acknowledgement of third-party rights may prompt greater participation by non-party stakeholders where disputes turn on third party licences. By backing a single approach to redactions and outlining how factual mistakes can be corrected, the court has sharpened understanding of the treatment of confidential information in UK proceedings. Even so, the judgment stresses that any departure from open justice must be exceptional and justified by compelling reasons, so applicants must articulate and justify their proposals. Citing his reasoning in Unwired Planet v...
News summary The Mo U, created for the LGA, provides a model document to help LGPS administering authorities get ready for pensions dashboard connectivity with AVC providers. It is issued with firm caveats, namely: no liability is accepted no reliance by third parties a clear expectation that each authority seeks its own legal advice Nonetheless, the Mo U is expected to aid authorities in mapping data responsibilities, reviewing AVC contracts, and ensuring both technical and legal preparedness in advance of the ultimate pensions dashboards connection deadline of 31 October 2026......
Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Sahonta [2025] EAT 166 What are the practical implications of this case? This EAT ruling clarifies that, where appropriate, appointing a provisional liquidator can amount to bankruptcy or comparable insolvency proceedings commenced with the objective of liquidating the transferor's assets, for the purposes of the Transfer of Undertakings ( Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 ( TUPE 2006), SI 2006/246, reg 8(7). That position triggers the disapplication of ( TUPE 2006), SI 2006/246, regs 4 and 7, which otherwise govern the transfer of employment and employees and the rule of automatic unfair dismissal. What was the background? ......
In this issue: Contract law Building safety Infrastructure projects Energy projects Environmental issues Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Contract law Supreme Court confirms the ‘ Mackay v Dick’ notion is not part of English law; wrongful prevention of a condition’s fulfilment yields damages only, not a debt ( King Crude Carriers SA and others v Ridgebury November LLC and others) The Supreme Court in King Crude Carriers SA v Ridgebury November LLC [2025] UKSC 39 unanimously decided that English law does not recognise the so‑called ‘ Mackay v Dick principle’, by which a party that improperly stops a contractual condition being met is treated as though the condition were satisfied. The Court held that the sellers’ claims to deposits could not succeed as debts; their exclusive remedy lay in damages for breach of contract. The judgment underlines that English contract law should turn on...
Nefelia Shipping SA v Mosaic Fertilizantes Do Brazil [2025] EWHC 2941 ( Comm). What was the background? The claimants commenced proceedings against Brazilian cargo interests and their underwriters, seeking general average contributions under bonds and guarantees executed in March 2018. The dispute stemmed from the M/ V ' KONA TRADER' running aground at Paranagua after a main engine breakdown in March 2018; the general average adjusters assessed the defendants’ share at US$892,381.46 plus interest. Both defendants had expressly chosen English law and the exclusive jurisdiction of the High Court of Justice in London. The claim form was issued on 11 September 2023, and the claimants sought a 15‑month period for service, anticipating difficulties in serving the Brazilian parties. That initial extension was granted on 22 September 2023, carrying validity through to 15 November 2024. Nonetheless, compliant papers reached the FPS only on 4 October 2024, so a...
Early TM Screening Although pre-assessment checks have already been available within the EUIPO’s online filing forms, the new Early TM Screening consolidates them into a single, dedicated and user-friendly tool. As the office noted, this helps businesses and legal representatives prepare filings more quickly and with greater confidence. With some functions driven by artificial intelligence, the tool will immediately analyse a variety of potential issues, including possible conflicts with existing trade marks and domain......
In this issue: Corporate insolvency processes Personal insolvency Restructuring R& I in Scotland International restructuring and insolvency Daily and weekly news alerts Key dates for restructuring and insolvency professionals New content Corporate insolvency processes Winding-up petition dismissed due to genuine and substantial dispute ( Abcor Finance Securities Ltd v Binomia Ltd) The High Court rejected a winding-up petition because the claimed debt was genuinely and substantially disputed. This serves as a reminder to creditors that insolvency proceedings are not the proper setting for resolving contractual disagreements. The background to the ruling also underscores the need for exact drafting in loan agreements, particularly regarding repayment provisions. For further detail, see News Analysis: Winding-up petition dismissed due to genuine and substantial dispute ( Abcor Finance Securities Ltd v Binomia Ltd), authored by Helen Martin, managing associate at Stevens & Bolton...
In this issue Key DR developments Claims and remedies Cross-border disputes Injunctions Litigation Case management Civil appeals Scottish Dispute Resolution New content Dates for your diary Useful information Lex Talk®Dispute Resolution: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Key DR developments Speeches Master of the Rolls delivers a speech that highlights the International Jurisdiction Taskforce to align digital asset laws The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has released the speech by Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls, delivered on 6 November 2025 at the 45th Anniversary of the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary University of London. In that address, he set out the creation and remit of the International Jurisdiction Taskforce—an international body formed in July 2025 to foster alignment of private law systems for digital assets, digital finance and digital trade across multiple jurisdictions, including the UK, the United States of America, France, Singapore, Australia, Japan and the European Union. For further detail, see: Master of the Rolls...
State aid Court of Justice rules Bulgaria failed to take necessary steps to recover State aid granted to private forest owners The Court of Justice has delivered its judgment in Case C- 632/23 Commission v Bulgarie (Échanges de terrains forestiers II), arising from an action by the Commission over Bulgaria’s failure to implement the Commission’s decision in SA.26212 concerning support granted to private forest owners. The Court found for the Commission, concluding that Bulgaria did not adopt the requisite measures to recover State aid awarded to enable private holders of forest land to exchange their properties for State-owned forests... Background In 1947, Bulgaria nationalised all forest land. After private property rights were restored post‑2000, Bulgaria commenced the return of forest areas to former owners. From 2002, national rules permitted the exchange of privately owned forest plots with publicly owned parcels from the State forest fund, with...
Subsidy Control CMA updated its guidance on the role of the Subsidy Advice Unit The CMA has issued an updated edition of its guidance on how the Subsidy Advice Unit ( SAU) carries out its subsidy control functions, originally published in November 2022 ahead of the Subsidy Control Act ( Act) 2022 coming into force. Under the Act, the SAU produces independent, non-binding reports on subsidies referred by public authorities, evaluating their impact on competition and investment in the UK, and overseeing and reviewing the wider operation of the subsidy control regime. The update clarifies the SAU’s remit, procedures and assessment framework, and mirrors its present practice......
Boulting v HMRC Commissioners [2025] UKFTT 1272 ( TC) What was the background? Case background Mr Boulting appealed a closure notice issued on 9 October 2019 that revised his 2014/15 tax return to reclassify the consideration for PSC Training and Development Group Ltd’s ( PSC) purchase of his shares as a distribution rather than a capital gain, thereby increasing his tax liability by £1,008,621.39. He was PSC’s managing director and majority shareholder—initially holding 55%, later 50 B shares—at a training business he helped acquire through a management buyout in 1993. Board-level tensions developed between older directors (including Mr Boulting) and younger directors (including his son, Mark) over investing in fixed assets to upgrade premises and IT systems, and over the manner in which key management decisions should be taken. The disagreements were damaging the business: one STG director had resigned and a senior manager was...
CJEU recognises Meta’s direct interest in Bindl appeal Meta has been deemed to have a direct stake in German citizen Thomas Bindl’s action against the European Commission, with a 29 October 2025 order from the Court of Justice of the EU stating that the outcome could bear on the legality of Meta’s own data-transfer arrangements under EU privacy rules. The ruling permits Meta to submit representations backing the Commission; the company declined to comment. “ The court can now put Meta’s Standard Contractual Clauses ( SCCs) to the test as well,” said Bindl’s counsel, Christian Däuble of Spirit Legal. SCCs are contractual instruments enabling personal data to be sent beyond the EU subject to defined privacy safeguards. “ As it will also rule, following Mr Latombe’s appeal, on the validity of the Data Privacy Framework, we welcome this step as it should deliver legal...
In recent weeks, penalties aimed at Russia’s energy industry have widened markedly, reflecting concerns that Moscow is not genuinely pursuing a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Ukraine. Designed to squeeze funding for Russia’s war effort, the measures seek to curb income from worldwide sales of fossil fuels. UK actions of 15 October 2025, followed by US steps on 22 October 2025 and EU measures on 23 October 2025, focus on Russia’s two biggest oil producers, Rosneft Oil Co and Lukoil OAO, and extend to entities in third countries that broker or trade Russian energy products. The UK and EU have additionally trailed new trade curbs linked to energy, targeting Russian liquefied natural gas ( LNG) and refined oil produced in third countries from Russian crude. Collectively, these moves mark a notable intensification of sanctions on Russia, with scope to influence diverse...
Publishing the data on 10 November 2025, the ABI has urged that cyber-insurance should form ‘a part of every organisation’s modern risk management strategy’. It noted the report’s figures were drawn from participating member firms and, as such, do not entirely reflect the complete picture for cyber-insurance across the UK. Jonathan Fong, the ABI’s head of general insurance policy, warned that cyber-threats are rapidly increasing in both scale and sophistication, adding that cyber-insurance must be ‘a critical component of every organisation’s modern risk management strategy’......
This development follows the recent snapback of all nuclear‑related sanctions on Iran at UN level, after the United Nations Security Council declined to extend sanctions relief. The EU has revived its restrictive measures through six legal instruments. Four took effect on 29 September 2025: Council Decision ( CFSP) 2025/1978, Council Implementing Decision ( CFSP) 2025/1971, Council Implementing Regulation ( EU) 2025/1980 and Council Implementing Regulation ( EU) 2025/1982. The remaining two entered into force on 30 September 2025: Council Regulation ( EU) 2025/1975 and Council Decision ( CFSP) 2025/1972. Collectively, these acts reinstate measures previously adopted by the UN Security Council and transposed into EU law, alongside additional autonomous EU restrictions. These include targeted sanctions on named individuals and entities—travel bans, asset freezes and a bar on providing funds or other economic...
See Q& A: What is the appropriate clause to include in a Will for a member of a limited liability partnership ( LLP), where the LLP qualifies for 100% Business property relief, and the members' agreement provides for a buyout of the deceased member’s interest, considering the testator has a surviving spouse and children? A partnership deed commonly stipulates, on a partner’s death, that the remaining partner or partners will acquire the testator’s stake by purchase under the agreed terms......
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
