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
What was the background to the consultation? What was proposed? On 14 November 2024, the Df E opened a consultation examining adjustments to member contribution rates and the extension of Fair Deal to further education institutions within the TPS. The department requested feedback on potential increases to member rates after the 2020 scheme valuation indicated a lower-than-expected member contribution yield. In the TPS, members collectively are expected to contribute 9.6% of pay across the entire membership — the ‘member contribution yield’ — yet the 2020 estimate came in at 9.45%. The consultation papers highlighted that, if contribution rates were left unchanged, the resulting shortfall in member payments would need to be met by employers and, in the end, the taxpayer. Consequently, the Df E consulted on keeping the current six-tier contribution model, while raising the member contribution rates for tiers 2 to 6 by 0.3...
The High Court found on 30 May 2025 that landlord London Trocadero (2015) LLP had charged commission levels, from 2020–25 ,above the norm to its tenant: cinema company Picturehouse Cinemas Ltd. London Trocadero is ultimately owned by billionaire property developer Asif Aziz. At the outset of a March 2025 trial, Picturehouse and its parent Cineworld Cinemas told the court they had leased part of the landmark Trocadero building in the West End. The cinema companies claimed that between 2015–21 the landlord overcharged ‘insurance rent’, the tenant’s contribution towards the building’s insurance premium under the lease. London Trocadero sits within the Criterion Group, which reports a property portfolio worth more than £4bn. According to the judgment, Criterion Capital acted as managing agent within the group and arranged the property insurance for London Trocadero. The judgment records that Criterion Capital placed a block policy with a...
Mergers The CMA has opened an invitation to comment regarding the finalised acquisition of ABVR Holdings Limited by Constellation Developments Limited—see the case page for further details. NOTE— For every live merger currently before the CMA, consult the UK mergers—ongoing cases tracker. Subsidy control The Subsidy Advice Unit has agreed to prepare a report offering advice to Lewisham London Borough Council on its intended subsidy for Besson Street LLP—see the case page for more. NOTE— For all decisions referred to the Subsidy Advice Unit under the Subsidy Control Act 2022, see the UK subsidy control—ongoing cases tracker. Upcoming dates For dates of forthcoming UK competition developments, please refer to the UK Competition calendar......
Bevan v Ministry of Defence [2025] EWHC 1145 ( KB) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling is poised to become a key authority on handling acoustic shock claims within occupational environments. The court squarely endorsed the Grindleford Criteria, devised in Parker et al (2020) ( Parker, W. A. E., Parker, V. L., Parker, G., & Parker, A. J. (2020). Acoustic shock: an update review. The Journal of Laryngology & Otology, 134(10), 861–865), as the definitive framework for deciding whether an acoustic shock has occurred. Practitioners should be aware that claims resting solely on exposure—absent a specific acoustic event, close temporal onset of symptoms, sufficient symptomatology, and lateral consistency—are unlikely to succeed. The judgment confirms that establishing causation requires a demonstrable mechanism of injury. Generalised or ongoing noise will not meet the threshold in an acoustic shock claim; the claimant must show that their...
The Water Services Regulation Authority ( Ofwat) hit Thames Water with a fine of £123m on 28 May 2025 for breaching rules governing its wastewater management and its unjustified payment of dividends. In imposing its biggest sanction to date, the regulator invoked 2023 powers—unused until now—that allow it to vary licences without firms’ agreement. Lawyers view the sanction as a clear warning that environmental, social and governance shortcomings rank among the foremost risks businesses face from Ofwat and other British enforcement bodies, describing the fine as a shot across the bows for companies across all sectors. Trevor Francis, a regulatory investigations partner at Blackfords LLP, said the case underscores the need for proactive legal and regulatory risk reviews across industries, particularly where environmental damage or customer detriment can be anticipated. The embattled utility has drawn fierce criticism from politicians and the public after...
Wilson v Port of Felixstowe Pension Trustee Ltd [2025] EWHC 1271 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? The PO offers a swift, low‑cost and informal route for resolving complaints and disputes concerning occupational pensions; in essence, it is a simpler and cheaper substitute for court proceedings, and members as well as trustees are urged to use it. In short, it provides a more convenient path than issuing court claims, delivering outcomes more rapidly and with lower expense. However, two key points need to be clearly understood. First, the PO’s determinations have the effect of a court order: they are final and binding, creating a res judicata in relation to the issues decided, and thus finally settling those points. Second, unlike a court order, they can be appealed solely on a point of law, which makes them less...
Carvill- Biggs and another v Reading [2025] EWCA Civ 619 What are the practical implications of this case? The scope of an office-holder’s authority to recover ‘any property’ under IA 1986, s 234 plainly embraces real property and any estate or interest subsisting in such property. Upon the appointment of receivers, they are granted broad managerial powers, notably to take possession of and sell the asset for the lender’s benefit to satisfy the secured borrowing. From the time receivers are appointed over mortgaged land—or remain in post following an administration or liquidation—the asset no longer constitutes property ‘which the company is or appears to be entitled’. As a result, that real property cannot ground an application under IA 1986, s 234. The Civil Procedure Rules apply to insolvency matters unless disapplied or inconsistent with the Insolvency ( England and Wales) Rules 2016, SI...
Appeal by Dmitrii Ovsiannikov over UK Russia sanctions conviction Dmitrii Ovsiannikov, once a politician for Russia’s ruling party, has filed an appeal after his April conviction for breaching the UK’s Russia sanctions. He was found guilty of six counts of circumventing sanctions under the Russia ( Sanctions) ( EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/855, alongside two counts of money laundering. At Southwark Crown Court, a judge handed the former Russian trade minister and ex‑governor of Russian‑occupied Sevastopol a 40‑month prison term. Liam Lane of Peters & Peters, who acted for Ovsiannikov, confirmed an application had been submitted on his behalf. Ovsiannikov’s brother, Alexei Owsjanikow, received a 15‑month sentence, fully suspended, after he too was convicted of circumventing sanctions for paying the school fees of Ovsiannikov’s children. Owsjanikow’s lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment. These convictions and sentences were the first in the UK for...
On 28 May 2025, EY- Parthenon reported that 63% of UK firms running defined benefit pension schemes that issued a profit warning in the last quarter during the period blamed trade tariffs as a reason. EY- Parthenon cautioned trustees that sponsoring employers may soon seek to dip into funding surpluses as they look to counterbalance losses stemming from broken supply chains or market turbulence and uncertainty across markets. This alert comes after the government published proposals that would permit companies with a defined benefit scheme to draw on an estimated £160bn in pension surpluses under the plans......
Ireland’s government is set to table a nationwide prohibition on importing goods produced in Palestinian territories under Israeli occupation. Conditions in Gaza are continuing to deteriorate further as Israel curtails deliveries of aid and food. The United Nations has cautioned that this is driving starvation. Simon Harris, Ireland’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, described the step as modest, yet stressed that all countries have a duty to do everything possible to heighten pressure and create the conditions for a ceasefire, because the scale of the humanitarian calamity is scarcely conceivable......
Sanrose Investment Ltd v Foley and others; FWJ Legal Ltd (trading as Francis Wilkes & Jones) v Courtman and others [2025] EWHC 1071 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case for insolvency practitioners? Insolvency office-holders should, as ever, adopt a careful yet proportionate, principled, reasoned and impartial method when adjudicating proofs of debt, and record their rationale through a transparent audit trail. Taking this course should protect them from personal liability for costs even if a creditor (or any other party with standing) successfully contests the decision. What are the practical implications of this case for legal advisers? Legal advisers should press office-holders to use an evidence-led evaluation of claims, particularly where the creditor is connected to the company and/or the facts are uncertain. Office-holders should also be urged to obtain legal advice—and follow it—where issues of law influence the...
European Commission v Republic of Malta ECLI: EU: C:2025:283 What are the practical implications of this case? The judgment curbs Member States’ latitude in conferring nationality where this entails EU citizenship, and prohibits nationality—and thus EU citizenship—being awarded in return for fixed payments or investments. The court confirmed EU citizenship as a core status that demands a real connection between the applicant and the Member State. Granting nationality on the basis of finance alone would erode the substance of Union citizenship and violate the duty of sincere cooperation ( Article 4(3) TEU). The ruling bolsters the Commission’s supervisory function, making clear it can contest naturalisation arrangements that impinge on EU citizenship rights. It underscores the court’s resolve to safeguard the integrity of EU membership and citizenship. Other Member States operating investor programmes to draw in foreign capital must rethink or scrap such...
Eyre and others v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 566 ( TC) At issue were disposals of shares in Phoenix Spencer Sandbanks Ltd ( PSSL), a company that had purchased a mixed‑use property in Poole and was pursuing planning consent for its redevelopment. The appellants, both directors and shareholders, applied for entrepreneurs’ relief under Chapter 3, Part 5 of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 ( TCGA 1992), contending the sales were ‘qualifying business disposals’. The First‑tier Tribunal determined that, during the relevant one‑year period preceding the disposals, PSSL was not carrying on a trade. Over that timeframe the company’s income consisted solely of rent derived from the property, which it held as an investment asset, not trading stock......
As the SFO's drive for whistleblower incentives gathers momentum, corporations should consider the implications for managing misconduct risk On 22 April 2025, the Home Office unveiled the second part of Jonathan Fisher KC’s fraud offences review, the first independent examination of UK fraud law since 1986. Spanning six phases of the fraud lifecycle, the opening phase features an in-depth appraisal of rewards for criminal informants and whistleblowers. The Fisher review is anticipated to be pivotal to the Labour government’s fraud agenda, offering the SFO a key platform to advance incentives reform within government. Soon after the announcement, the SFO stated it would liaise with the Fisher Review team to set out its case for change. These moves followed HM Treasury’s March 2025 commitment to introduce a fresh informants’ scheme aimed at tackling serious tax non-compliance, with a focus on major...
The network of out-of-court dispute-settlement bodies The network of out-of-court dispute-settlement bodies has urged national authorities responsible for enforcing the EU’s DSA, alongside the Commission, to boost public awareness of users’ rights to contest content-moderation decisions. They cited poor visibility and weak uptake of the appeal route provided by the legislation. In a joint letter seen by MLex, the ODS Network — a newly created coalition of certified and candidate ODS bodies (see here) — pressed Digital Services Coordinators ( DSCs) in EU member states to close what it calls an “information gap” between online platforms’ extensive enforcement actions and users’ access to independent remedies. MLex understands the letter was also sent to the Commission. The DSA is chiefly a rulebook for platforms’ moderation of material hosted on their services. It covers leading social-media services including Facebook, Instagram, Tik Tok and You Tube, as well as a variety of...
Antitrust Commission penalises two online food delivery firms €329m in cartel settlement The Commission said it levied fines totalling €329m on Delivery Hero and Glovo for taking part in a cartel within the online food delivery market ( AT.40795). Both companies acknowledged their involvement and opted to settle. Background Delivery Hero and Glovo are some of the largest food delivery companies in Europe. They deliver meals (prepared by a restaurant or a professional kitchen), groceries and other retail (non-food) goods to customers ordering via an app or a website......
UK developments DESNZ consults on implementing voluntary carbon and nature market integrity principles The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero ( DESNZ) has opened a consultation to gather feedback on how to put into practice the UK Government’s six principles for integrity in voluntary carbon and nature markets ( VCNMs), assessing how they fit markets at varying stages of development. The Minister for Climate Change, Kerry Mc Carthy MP, unveiled these principles at COP29 in November 2024. It further seeks to define expectations for supplier and purchaser participation in VCNMs and to consider embedding such approaches within guidance, policy and possible regulation, underpinned by market frameworks that can institutionalise and scale high‑integrity practices. The call for views closes on 10 July 2025. See: LNB News 17/04/2025 13. Sources: Voluntary carbon and nature markets: raising integrity; UK backs businesses to trade carbon credits and unlock...
Background EA 2021, s 98 and Sch 14 extend BNG to applications under the TCPA 1990. After consultation from January to April 2022, the regime and accompanying regulations were commenced in two stages on 12 February and 2 April 2024, having first been intended for November 2023. For NSIPs consented by DCOs, the corresponding provisions are in EA 2021, s 99 and Sch 15 and were originally slated for November 2025. A consultation launched on 28 May, alongside an announcement that commencement would be deferred by six months to May 2026. This note outlines what is proposed in that consultation and highlights any differences from the equivalent TCPA 1990 implementation, which this proposal does not affect. The ecological measures in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill are also separate from, and additional to, this...
European Commission call for evidence on revising the SFDR On 2 May 2025, the European Commission (the Commission) issued a call for evidence ( Cf E) to inform an impact assessment within its continuing review of how the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation ( SFDR) operates. Through the Cf E, the Commission flags a number of weaknesses in the present SFDR framework, drawn from extensive input collected during its wide‑ranging evaluation launched in 2023. That exercise comprised two consultations (one public and one targeted), technical workshops with industry, and outreach to Member States, supervisors and civil society representatives (see our publication here). The Commission notes that, although many stakeholders recognise that the SFDR has improved transparency and given investors access to granular ESG data, they also report that putting the rules into practice is burdensome and expensive. While acknowledging the persistent, broad backing for both the...
R (on the application of Ryan Castellucci) v Gender Recognition Panel and another [2025] EWCA Civ 167 What are the practical implications of this case? In this appeal, the Court of Appeal followed the Supreme Court’s lead in R ( Elan- Cane) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 56; [2023] AC 559, confirming that UK law does not recognise non-binary gender and that the courts should not strain statutory wording to secure such recognition. A reform of this scale is for Parliament, not the judiciary. Citing the Divisional Court, the judgment provides a notable overview of differing legal approaches to non-binary or third-gender status across countries both within and outside Europe. The Court observed that Parliament could, in future, introduce a non-binary category through the foreign law route in the GRA, or incorporate it into domestic law, following public...
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
