Featured documents
Lucasfilm did not benefit in any way at Tyburn Film Productions Ltd's expense, counsel said to the appeals court there on 3 December 2025, in part because it already possessed rights over Cushing's likeness and an agreement and consent from the Cushing estate to 'resurrect' him as Grand Moff Tarkin. Tyburn contends it earlier made an agreement with the late actor then, at the time, granting the company a veto over any use of his image prior to his 1994 death. That contract concerns a TV series titled 'Heritage of Horror', which never aired. Tyburn further asserts the deal permits it to effectively 'resurrect' Cushing using stand-ins and CGI to ultimately finish the programme then if the actor were to die whilst filming remained in progress...
Irish telecom operator Eircom’s damages lawsuit against BT Group over a public-sector contract must be carefully managed to trial to deal with confidentiality issues and other matters, a UK judge told the parties today. At the High Court in London today, a judge said Eircom’s damages action against BT over a public-sector contract needs tight case management through to trial to address confidentiality and related concerns. Eircom brought the claim after Ofcom in 2020 penalised BT for its behaviour during a tender. Speaking to both sides, Judge Adam Johnson urged them to resolve any confidentiality flashpoints themselves and signalled he had no wish to step in unless it became unavoidable. He also expressed confidence that parties would do everything possible to keep confidential designations to a minimum, noting this was necessary to maintain control over the conduct of the trial. He framed this as the
The following document is attached: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/274 dated 5 February 2026, revising Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1981, establishing a final anti-dumping levy on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware produced in...
Justice Richard Arnold granted AstraZeneca leave to appeal and permitted lorries carrying about 175,000 packs of Glenmark’s generics to move on to wholesalers, provided they did not reach pharmacy shelves while the case continued at any point during those interim proceedings. In this way, Glenmark could keep its first-to-market advantage, while causing only minimal detriment to AstraZeneca should the Court of Appeal later be persuaded to issue an injunction against supply. The judge said this approach maintained the status quo with the least possible prejudice to Glenmark’s position overall. The hearing was arranged at short notice, just days after the High Court refused AstraZeneca an injunction to block the diabetes generic from sale while the court considered whether the patents supporting the branded medicine were valid in law. Glenmark, Generics (UK) Ltd and Teva Pharmaceuticals have each begun proceedings in the UK to set...
Most recent News
State aid Commission launches call for evidence on revision of rescue and restructuring State aid guidelines The Commission has opened a call for evidence and a consultation on plans to update the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial firms in difficulty. Adopted in July 2014, these Guidelines were set to lapse on 31 December 2020; however, the Commission prolonged them by three years while carrying out a ‘fitness check’ of the State aid rules and guidelines, and extended them by a further two years, to 31 December 2025. The Guidelines permit member states, under strict conditions, to provide support to struggling companies......
( Kingdom of Spain v Blasket Renewable Investments, LLC et al , No. 24-1130, US Supreme Court) ‘ Shallow and stale’ Respondent Blasket Renewable Investments LLC, assignee of rights under an International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes ( ICSID) award initially granted in favour of Dutch investors AES Solar Energy Coöperatief UA and Ampere Equity Fund BV, submits in its brief that the high court need not consider Spain’s contention that the ECT is ‘void ab initio’ under EU law. It contends the District of Columbia Circuit US Court of Appeals rightly determined, in the ruling under review, that Spain relinquished sovereign immunity under the arbitration exception of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act ( FSIA), 28 USC § 1605(a)(6), and consented to arbitrate with EU investors by virtue of its entry into the ECT ( Next Era Energy Global Holdings BV, et al v...
In this issue: Diversity and gender pay gap Whistleblowing Data protection and employee information Employment tribunals Dates for your diary Trackers Employment resources on Lexis+® Lex Talk®Employment: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Diversity and gender pay gap Law firms silent as they struggle to close partner pay gap Research from the new Law360 Gender Pay Gap Tool shows that one in two of the UK’s top-earning practices decline to disclose partner gender pay disparities, notwithstanding appeals for transparency since the framework began eight years ago. Statutory duties cover gaps for employees alone, leaving firms free to choose if, and in what form, they reveal inequality within partnerships. As a result, benchmarking is difficult and assessing progress is fraught, as organisations can alter presentation of figures or cease publication entirely. In 2024, 39 of the 111 firms...
In this issue: Key DR developments Claims and remedies Costs and funding Litigation Case management Applications—specific Evidence and disclosure ADR Dates for your diary Useful information Daily and weekly news alerts Key DR developments Online Procedure Rule Committee OPRC publishes details of its first annual open meeting on 20 October 2025: The Online Procedure Rule Committee ( OPRC) has released information on its inaugural annual open meeting, set for 20 October 2025 via Microsoft Teams. Those wishing to attend may apply for observer places, with applications closing on 15 September 2025. For further detail, see: Online Procedure Rule Committee: annual open meeting 20 October 2025. Court information HMCTS says 'no evidence' of an impact on cases following the widely-reported technical problem: HM Courts and Tribunals Service ( HMCTS) states that a widely reported technical issue did not...
In this issue: WTO Trade in goods Safeguards Subsidies and countervailing measures Anti-dumping Customs Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content WTO China initiates WTO consultations over Canadian steel and aluminium import measures The World Trade Organisation ( WTO) reports that China has requested dispute settlement consultations with Canada regarding Canadian measures on certain steel and aluminium imports. The request concerns Canada’s imposition of a 50% surtax through tariff-rate quotas on steel from non-free trade agreement partners, including China, and a 25% surtax on products using steel melted and poured in China or aluminium smelted and cast in China. China argues these actions impede market access and discriminate against inputs of Chinese origin. See: LNB News 20/08/2025 24. Trade in goods Commission and US announce joint trade and investment framework agreement The European Commission and the United States have...
In this issue: International arbitration Institutional and ad hoc arbitration Sector-and industry-specific arbitration Other arbitration and ADR-related news and developments Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Useful information International arbitration Four international arbitration trends to watch—midyear report With 2025 now past the halfway mark, international arbitration practitioners are tracking how climate change, geopolitical fault lines, and procedural as well as other innovations continue to shape cross-border dispute resolution. See News Analysis: Four international arbitration trends to watch midyear report... India—arbitrator’s non-disclosure and interim relief in foreign-seated arbitration The Delhi High Court has issued an anti-arbitration injunction in Engineering Projects ( India) Ltd v MSA Global LLC ( Oman), staying ICC proceedings seated in Singapore after an arbitrator failed to disclose a prior appointment by the opposing party’s chairman. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, sitting as a learned Single Judge, ruled that the...
The draft report characterises algorithmic management as the deployment of automated tools—including those using artificial intelligence—to supervise, evaluate, or take decisions that impact workers and solo self‑employed individuals. It builds on a Commission study released in March 2025, which concluded that, although current EU rules, such as Regulation 2016/679, the General Data Protection Regulation ( EU GDPR), mitigate certain risks to workers arising from algorithmic management, other risks persist. That study further acknowledges that the AI Act does not confer dedicated rights on workers where AI is applied, a point flagged as problematic. The draft also attaches proposed wording for a new directive governing algorithmic management at work. The European Parliament has not, at this stage, given its approval to the draft report yet......
SM v MM and others [2024] EWFC 463 SM v MM ( No 2) [2025] EWFC 244 SM v MM ( No 3) [2025] EWFC 245 What are the practical implications of this case? A judicial conclusion that a trust is a sham is exceedingly uncommon in divorce proceedings. Here, it came after the husband consistently asserted that a trust said to have been created in Cyprus in 2007 by his father with professional trustees was a standard, legitimate discretionary arrangement for the benefit of the parties’ two children. He argued it owned just one asset: the single issued share in a holding company, with the underlying trading businesses managed by wholly independent third parties. The wife’s case was that the trust was a sham and that the assets within it, valued at about £38m, were in truth controlled and...
In this issue: Key PI and Clinical negligence news Proving negligence or breach of statutory duty Occupational disease Claims involving a mentally incapacitated claimant Interim payments, periodical payments and provisional damages Costs and funding Other PI and Clinical negligence news Lexis Nexis® PI & Clinical Negligence Quantum Database Lexis Nexis® Quantum Portal Lex Talk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Lexis Nexis® Webinars Key PI and Clinical negligence news ACSO hails early indications of proposals in forthcoming Df T road safety review The Association of Consumer Support Organisations ( ACSO) has voiced support for signals from the Department for Transport ( Df T) on what may feature in its upcoming road safety review—the first in ten years. ACSO points out that, although serious road casualties fell from 41,000 in 2000 to 24,000 by 2010, they have since climbed by nearly 20%. Likely measures are expected to tackle drink- and...
In this issue: AI and IP Copyright & associated rights Trade marks/passing off Patents Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information AI and IP Generative AI in context of copyright—knowing your hypersurfaces from your stochastic parrots. Toby Headdon, of Bristows LLP, reviews the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Justice, Civil Liberties and Institutional Affairs’ study on Gen AI and the challenges it presents for copyright owners. The Parliament’s report is highly technical and uses dense terminology, which this article helpfully clarifies. See News Analysis: Generative AI in context of copyright—knowing your hypersurfaces from your stochastic parrots. Copyright & associated rights Foreign performers’ claims against the UK for failure to apply EU law on royalties potentially remain viable post- Brexit ( AFM and SAG- AFTRA v The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology). The High Court has refused applications for summary dismissal and strike out of...
Masters v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 967 ( TC) Employed in the UK by Tesco, Mr Masters had joined Tesco PLC’s defined benefit Pension Scheme back in 1983. In April 2016, he arranged for the cash equivalent value of his defined benefit rights—just shy of £6m—to be transferred into a UK SIPP vehicle. He relocated to Portugal in March 2019 and, from the 2019–20 tax year onwards, was treated as non‑ UK tax resident. While living in Portugal he was taxed under the Non‑ Habitual Resident regime, benefitting from exemptions on foreign‑source income, which encompassed withdrawals of £3.5m from his SIPP. Nevertheless, those withdrawals were taxed at source in the UK, resulting in £1.5m of tax being paid. HMRC then operated a PAYE tax code on the SIPP pension; Mr Masters sought instead the issue of an NT (no tax) code. In July 2020, he filed his UK...
Parallel trade of goods This principle, in effect, underpins the parallel movement of goods. Parallel trade describes the import and export of authentic goods that have already been lawfully placed on the market, where the IP owner’s rights are exhausted. Within the EU, the European Economic Area ( EEA) applies a regional exhaustion model. With limited exceptions, once goods are put on the EEA market—either by the IP owner or with the owner’s consent—those rights are spent; in practice, the owner cannot manage or oppose further dealings in those goods. The IP rights in goods first placed on the market in the UK have not been treated or recognised as exhausted in the EU since: the UK left the EU on 31 January 2020; the Brexit transition period ended on 31 December 2020; and the UK is no longer a member of the...
Updated on 14 August 2025 at 13:01 GMT: Following our initial publication, the DPC clarified the inspected hospital’s name. Statement to follow in due course......
In this issue: Adjudication Contract law Arbitration Procurement Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Adjudication Adjudicator’s fees, payless notices, and the residential occupier’s exception ( RBH v James) In RHB Building Contractors Ltd v James and another [2025] EWHC 2005 ( TCC), the Technology and Construction Court examined a range of points stemming from an adjudicator’s award. RBH sought roughly £663k and prevailed in a ‘smash and grab’ adjudication. The employer defeated summary enforcement, advancing an arguable case that it was a residential occupier for the purposes of section 106 of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996—thought to be the first reported occasion on which this defence to summary judgment has succeeded. The employer had also brought a Part 8 claim and convinced the court that its ‘...
In this issue: Intellectual property Data protection and life sciences Confidential information Borderline products Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers Useful information Intellectual property Court of Appeal upholds Patents Court finding that prostate cancer treatment was not obvious ( Accord v Astellas) This decision from Lord Justice Arnold is essential reading if you plan to brief an expert in a patent dispute. The Court of Appeal rejected an appeal against the Patents Court’s conclusion that the patent was not invalid over the prior art cited. The obviousness case fell down largely because the expert’s analysis was affected by hindsight. Written by Giles Parsons, partner at Browne Jacobson, and Annabel Taylor, trainee at Browne Jacobson. See News Analysis: Court of Appeal upholds Patents Court finding that prostate cancer treatment was not obvious ( Accord v...
Saipem Sp A v Petrofac Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 821 As only the third appellate ruling under the Companies Act 2006, Part 26A, on restructuring plans, this Court of Appeal case offers material direction for practitioners. Patrick Schumann, partner; Jonathan Swil, partner; and Ben Gray, trainee, all at King & Spalding International LLP, examine the far‑reaching consequences of this seminal ruling for restructuring law, particularly the standards of fairness in corporate reorganisations and how courts will assess future plans. The court reiterates that the core function of the cross‑class cramdown is to neutralise an unwarranted veto by hold‑out creditors; it is not a mechanism for supportive creditors to capture an inequitable portion of the restructuring upside. Petrofac, a worldwide oilfield services group employing over 8,000 people, operates via more than 100 entities in 30 jurisdictions. Before proposing the plans, it had come under...
RBH Building Contractors Ltd v James and another [2025] EWHC 2005 ( TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? It is widely regarded as the first occasion on which a responding party has successfully invoked the residential occupier exception in s 106 of the HGCRA 1996 to stop summary enforcement of an adjudicator’s award. Because adjudication has proved an effective route to resolve disputes, and given the danger of satellite litigation, the exception has typically attracted judicial scepticism. The Honourable Mr Justice Coulson (as he then was) remarked in Westfields Construction Ltd v Lewis: ‘ Is it not time for HGCRA 1996, s 106, and the other exceptions to statutory adjudication, to be done away with, so that all parties to a construction contract can enjoy the benefits of...
Aon’s 2025 Discretionary Pension Increase Survey Polling of over 200 defined benefit pension schemes for Aon’s 2025 Discretionary Pension Increase Survey found that 13% awarded members a discretionary rise in 2024, down from 17% in 2023, the firm noted. Some 12% of DB schemes signalled an intention to award a discretionary uplift in 2025, Aon said. The timing of the survey was not immediately set out. Nick Coates, Associate Partner and Head of Member Distributions at Aon, remarked that pensions are grappling with evolving challenges around increases and the allocation of surpluses to members. He added: the share of schemes granting a discretionary pension increase in 2024 was lower than the year before, and a comparable pattern appears to be forming for 2025......
By law, employers must publish pay gap figures solely for their staff, leaving law firms to choose if and how they reveal disparities within partnerships. This flexibility materially hampers like-for-like comparisons over time and obscures any sense of progress, as firms can alter how they present their numbers or drop publication entirely. In 2024, 39 of the 111 firms reviewed by Law360 voluntarily shared a business-wide median pay gap—a weighted blend of partner and employee gaps—across their operations. The average stood at 33.8%, versus 26.7% for employees alone during the same period. Of the 51 firms that issued a separate partner-only gap for 2024, the median was 24.7%, an increase of 2.8 percentage points on 2023 figures. Female representation in partnerships also trails noticeably. Women account for just 37% of partners in the UK, according to data from the Solicitors...
In this issue: Energy efficiency and buildings Energy for environmental lawyers Environmental enforcement and prosecutions ESG and sustainability Hazardous substances and chemicals Nature, biodiversity and habitat conservation Waste Waste producer responsibility regimes Water, flooding and drainage Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q& A Energy efficiency and buildings The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero ( DESNZ) has issued its 2025 post‑implementation review ( PIR) of the Energy Savings Opportunity Scheme ( ESOS) Regulations 2014 ( SI 2014/1643). Using Phase 3 compliance notifications from the Environment Agency, together with unpublished interim data from Phase 3 action plans, and building on the 2020 PIR, it recommends holding off any major amendments to the ESOS Regulations until a full evaluation ends in May 2026, after which a...
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
