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
Changizi v Changizi and others [2025] EWHC 735 ( Ch) The son argued that inheritance tax ( IHT) on the estate ought to be taken from the residuary fund before any division between him and his mother, invoking Re Benham's Will Trusts [1995] STC 21. By contrast, the executors split the residue into exempt and chargeable elements, then met the IHT solely from the taxable portion attributed to the son, relying on the later authority of Re Ratcliffe [1999] STC 262. The High Court ( HC) determined that Re Ratcliffe supplies the correct approach, while Re Benham was exceptional and turned on its own facts, setting no general principle. Section 41(b) of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 prohibits deducting IHT from the exempt share of residue and must therefore be applied. Consequently, the executors’...
The Civil Justice Council ( CJC) The Civil Justice Council ( CJC), which advises the government and the judiciary on civil justice and procedure in England and Wales, recommended in a report on 9 April 2025 that enforcement of unpaid judgments across all civil courts should be brought under a single court. Geoffrey Vos, the Master of the Rolls, said civil enforcement in England and Wales has long been overly complex and unwieldy, noting an obvious need for rationalisation and modernisation, yet it has perhaps always been put in the 'too difficult' box. As head of civil justice and chair of the CJC, Vos said the council has concluded the present system cannot continue and that more must be done to minimise cost and delay. The enforcement working group was asked to consider how enforcing judgments could be made more effective and...
New Risk & Compliance forecast as at 15 April 2025 Our Risk and Compliance forecast, dated 15 April 2025, charts proposed regulatory changes linked to risk & compliance, helping you prepare for any adjustments that may affect your organisation, and to support planning efforts. Please read it closely; nevertheless, a number of points that ought to be on your radar are summarised below......
The UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association ( UKSIF) On 10 April 2025, the UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association ( UKSIF) urged ministers to avoid drastic steps, including compelling UK pension schemes to earmark a fixed share of assets under management for UK-based investments and other domestic holdings. The group also argued that the nation’s £3trn pension pot could more effectively foster economic expansion by investing in the green economy across the country. Representing a broad spectrum of financial services providers, UKSIF said the government should use the next stage of its pensions review to assess how Europe’s largest pensions market can be harnessed to deliver sustainable, long-term growth over time for Britain......
Mergers Keysight Technologies fined for failing to provide documents to the CMA during phase 1 investigation The CMA issued a notice dated 9 April 2025 imposing a penalty on Keysight Technologies, Inc ( Keysight) under section 110 of the Enterprise Act 2002. This followed Keysight’s non-compliance with section 109 notices served by the CMA that required specified information and documents during the phase 1 assessment of its anticipated acquisition of Spirent Communications plc ( Spirent). The CMA set a fine of £25,000 on Keysight. Background Keysight and Spirent both supply communications testing and measurement equipment. 22 March 2024: Keysight lodged an initial bid to obtain sole control of Spirent. 27 March 2024: Spirent’s board approved this initial proposal. 28 March 2024: Keysight agreed to secure sole control via a public offer for all of Spirent’s issued (and to be issued) share capital. 17 July 2024: The parties filed a draft merger notice with the...
In an order dated 10 April 2025, US District Judge P Kevin Castel found Madison Pacific Trust had persuasively demonstrated the need for judicial involvement, as the corporate trustee services provider had exhaustively pursued other methods to serve process on Sergiy Groza and Volodymyr Naumenko, founders of the Ukrainian grain-exporting conglomerate GNT Group. He observed that the arbitration against Groza and Naumenko ended in January with a final US$149m award in Madison’s favour. He added that the corporate trustee services provider commenced proceedings in the High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Commercial Court, where the GNT Group founders were at first represented by Swiss firm Fortior Law SA. However, in March 2024, Groza and Naumenko informed the High Court that they would act in person, according to Judge Castel’s order. Even after Fortior ceased to act, the...
What does the Guidance cover? The Guidance covers the following topic: Core principles of anonymisation and pseudonymisation The Guidance opens by affirming the core legal position: anonymised information lies beyond the reach of the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation, Assimilated Regulation ( EU) 2016/679 ( UK GDPR), whereas pseudonymised information does not. The ICO then explains how this plays out in practice and the advantages linked to each category of data. It frames anonymisation as a personal data minimisation exercise, and pseudonymisation as a means of mitigating risk. Anonymisation involves transforming data so that the individuals to whom it pertains are not, or are no longer, identifiable. Under the UK GDPR, the standard is ‘effective’ anonymisation—reducing the chance of a person being identified to a sufficiently remote level, thereby severing any link between the information and the individual. Merely removing direct...
George Mantides Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKUT 124 ( TCC) M delivered the services at issue to Royal Berkshire Hospital ( RBH) in 2013. In 2019, the First-tier Tax Tribunal ( FTT) determined that those services resulted in deemed earnings under the IR35 regime. The FTT also concluded that M’s work for a separate hospital did not fall within IR35. That latter finding was not appealed because both the FTT and the UT refused HMRC additional time to seek permission to appeal, HMRC having missed the prescribed deadline. The company challenged the FTT’s ruling concerning M’s services to RBH. In 2021, the UT found that the FTT had wrongly constructed the hypothetical contract between M and RBH by inserting terms (1) obliging RBH to......
Counsel for Yaxley- Lennon, better known as Tommy Robinson, argued that his client is held in segregation for his own protection, a regime said to have prompted a ‘deterioration’ in his health. Alisdair Williamson KC of Three Raymond Buildings said that, while authorities are keeping him safe by isolating him, that very safeguard is making him progressively more unwell than the sentencing judge anticipated. In October, Judge Jeremy Johnson imposed an 18 month prison term for breaching a court order that forbade him from repeating false claims about a Syrian schoolboy refugee who had already won a libel action. Jamal Hijazi, aged 15 at the time, had sued over allegations of violence, assertions Yaxley- Lennon maintained at trial were true. After a 2021 trial, High Court Judge Matthew Nicklin found the allegations were false. He ordered Yaxley- Lennon not to repeat them and to pay...
Whitehouse v Ministry of Defence ET 1401357/2022. Employment Judge Adrian Hogarth, in a decision made on 4 April 2025 and released on 9 April 2025, dismissed the Ministry of Defence’s bid to strike out the claim brought by reservist Mr Whitehouse. The department had contended that members of the reserve forces fall expressly outside the scope of the Part-time Workers ( Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, SI 2000/1551, which confer parity of treatment with full-time staff. Judge Hogarth ultimately concluded that the reservist carve-out does not prevent Whitehouse from proceeding with his case. Whitehouse alleges he faced detriment for highlighting that part-time workers’ entitlement to equal treatment had been breached, he added. While the judge accepted the regulations can be read as excluding his grievances, he considered that express references to carrying out training and other voluntary obligations indicate the...
Mergers The Commission approved A- Ware Dairy & Cream B. V. acquiring sole control of the Dairy Food Group through its acquisition...
Mergers The Commission approved: the purchase of exclusive control over YOOX Net- A- Porter Group S.p. A. by MYT Netherlands Parent B. V. ...
Mergers The CMA commenced its Phase 1 review and published an invitation to comment on the anticipated acquisition involving SES S. A....
This latest increase is again in response to the White House’s escalated tariffs, the Customs Tariff Commission of China’s State Council said in a statement on 11 April 2025. As of 11 April 2025, China’s retaliatory tariffs stand currently at 84%, following a rise from 34% that took effect on 10 April 2025. The Chinese cabinet unit said that, at current tariff levels, there is no market acceptance for US goods exported to China at present. It added that, therefore, if the US continues to impose additional tariffs on Chinese goods exported to the US, China will disregard them, signalling this could be the last tariff hike from China. The White House clarified on 10 April 2025 that the US has now imposed 145% additional tariffs on China, including a 20% punitive tariff over Chinese shipments of ingredients for fentanyl to North...
In a non-binding opinion, Advocate General Tamara Ćapeta held that the EUIPO erred by overlooking Nowhere Co Ltd’s UK trade marks when it dismissed the company’s opposition to Junguo Ye’s 2015 trade mark application for a cartoon monkey. Ćapeta noted that Nowhere Co’s registrations remained in force up to the UK’s exit from the EU at midnight on 31 December 2020, so a clash with Ye’s logo could have existed until that point. She added that, from 1 January 2021, when the UK left the EU, the EUIPO could have automatically rejected the opposition for the period thereafter. Nevertheless, the advocate general maintained that Nowhere Co continued to be entitled to invoke its protections for the interval running from 2015 to 31 December 2020......
Rukhadze and others v Recovery Partners GP Ltd and another [2025] UKSC 10 Background This appeal concerns the fiduciary ‘profit rule’. Fiduciaries, including trustees and company directors, owe a duty of loyalty to their beneficiary or principal (the person for whom they hold or administer property, eg the company in the case of a director). That duty includes a requirement that, where a fiduciary derives a profit by virtue of their position, they must account for that gain to the principal, unless the principal has given fully informed consent. The respondents to this appeal are a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands (to which the claims of another such company have been assigned) together with an English LLP. The individual appellants were engaged by the respondents and occupied roles of trust and responsibility (for example serving as directors), thereby owing fiduciary duties to them. In...
Note: the CPRC no longer distributes the background papers with the minutes, so no explanatory documents accompany this News Analysis. A copy of the minutes can be found here: Minutes of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee. Welcome, action log and matters arising (item 1) The minutes from the 7 February 2025 meeting were approved and the action log noted—see News Analysis: Minutes of the CPR Committee meeting—7 February 2025. The following items were raised: Transparency & Open Justice Board’s Key Objectives Consultation—the CPRC’s response to the consultation was recorded, and an update given on the CPRC Sub- Committee on Access to Court Documents. The sub-committee’s work is progressing well, and the initial view is that the CPRC will be asked to consider a draft pilot PD to trial a scheme enabling non-parties to obtain court documents, as highlighted in Cape Holdings v Dring [2019] UKSC 38. It...
Mergers The Commission has been notified of: PSPIB/ CBRE/ AGIV ( M.11953), Lone Star/ Radici ( M.11931), and Rethmann/ Transdev ( M.11893), each under the simplified merger procedure. Public versions of decisions are now available for: Midea/ Arbonia ( M.11570)—see further, decision; and CTS Eventim/ FNAC Darty/ France Billet ( M.11279)—see further, decision. NOTE— For all current merger investigations before the Commission, see further, EU mergers—ongoing cases tracker. Antitrust The Commission released its Summary Decision, the Advisory Committee’s Opinion, and the Hearing Officer’s Final Report in Second-hand rolling stock ( AT.40401) (collective boycott)—see further, Summary Decision, Opinion of the Advisory Committee, and Final Report of the Hearing Officer. NOTE— For all live behavioural investigations before the Commission, see further, EU behavioural investigations—ongoing cases tracker. State aid Under EU State aid rules, the Commission cleared an amendment to a Czech scheme...
Arthur J Gallagher Insurance Brokers Ltd must pay Watford Community Housing Trust A High Court ruling dated 8 April 2025 holds that Arthur J Gallagher Insurance Brokers Ltd is liable to Watford Community Housing Trust for any loss exceeding the £6m already recovered under the trust’s insurance programme. David Bailey KC, sitting as a deputy judge, concluded that, unless a policy expressly provides otherwise, there is no general legal rule that, in situations of double or multiple insurance, a doctrine of rateable proportion restricts each insurer’s liability to its policyholder. The dispute arose after a Watford Community Housing staff member inadvertently released personal information concerning more than 3,500 tenants and employees in March 2020. Gallagher had placed the trust’s relevant cover, underwritten by Pen, QBE and Hiscox, to respond to losses stemming from a data breach of this nature....
In this issue: UK Competition policy UK subsidy control EU antitrust Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Caselex UK Competition policy CMA publishes report analysing past industrial policies to inform government’s design of a new industrial strategy The CMA’s Microeconomics Unit has produced a report that analyses industrial policies to guide the UK government as it shapes a new industrial strategy. It reviews measures previously adopted in the UK and in peer economies, and evaluates how those interventions have influenced productivity, investment, innovation, employment and competition. The study also explores economic vibrancy and competitive dynamics across the eight growth-driving sectors highlighted in the government’s Industrial Strategy Green Paper, published in November 2024. Bringing together fresh evidence, the report looks at how industrial policies are distributed and their effects, profiles the...
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
