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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Private actions CAT issues judgment granting partial strike out in Gutmann collection action against Apple over ‘battery throttling’ The CAT has handed down its ruling in Mr Justin Gutmann v Apple Inc., Apple Distribution International Limited, and Apple Retail UK Limited, regarding an application by Apple Inc., Apple Distribution International Limited, and Apple Retail UK Limited (together, Apple) seeking summary judgment and/or to strike out collective proceedings brought by Mr Justin Gutmann (the Class Representative) under section 47B of the Competition Act 1998. Background In 2022, the Class Representative sought to commence opt-out collective proceedings under section 47B of the Competition Act 1998 against Apple, alleging abuse of dominance arising from its management of battery problems and the deployment of performance management features ( PMF) in certain i Phone models......
Financial services developments FCA restrictions imposed on Sendsii Ltd following HMRC suspension of registration The Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA) has set conditions on Sendsii Ltd that bar it from conducting any regulated activities. Following HM Revenue and Customs ( HMRC) suspending the firm’s registration on 9 October 2025, the FCA served a First Supervisory Notice on Sendsii Ltd. As a result, the company no longer satisfied the criteria for its FCA authorisation under the Payment Services Regulations 2017. Under these measures, Sendsii Ltd must not perform regulated services, including money remittance, without the regulator’s prior written approval. The firm must repay all monies held for, or on behalf of, existing customers, in accordance with relevant legal and regulatory obligations. The FCA’s webpage provides guidance for potentially affected...
See Q& A: Can a solicitor certify copies of a birth, marriage or death certificate where the document for copying is an official copy of the relevant register? A certified copy is a precise, full and up‑to‑date reproduction—typically a photocopy—of an original record. It does not attest that the original is genuine, authentic or suitable for the purpose for which it was issued; it affirms that the copy is a faithful reproduction of the original shown to the person certifying it (for example, a solicitor or notary). If the item being reproduced is an official birth, death, marriage or civil partnership certificate (‘official certificates’), a copy endorsed by a solicitor or notary cannot be used as evidence of the event to which the document......
EU financial services developments ECB fines Nordea subsidiary for breach of large exposures limit The European Central Bank ( ECB) has levied an administrative fine of €2.26m on Nordea Finance Finland Ltd ( Nordea Rahoitus Suomi Oy) for misreporting its largest exposures and breaching the large exposures threshold. Over 13 consecutive quarters between 2021 and 2024, the institution allocated guaranteed receivables to debtors rather than to guarantors when calculating large exposures, contrary to a regulatory amendment introduced in 2021. As a result, the bank exceeded the 25% cap laid down in EU law. The ECB judged the infringements to be the result of serious negligence, and weaknesses within the bank’s internal controls contributed to both the occurrence and the duration of the breach. The bank retains the right to challenge the ECB’s decision before the Court of Justice of the EU......
John Ormerod, a 75-year-old former accountant from London, was hit with UK sanctions in May 2025, linked to his acquisition of 26 vessels valued at hundreds of millions of pounds between December 2022 and August 2023. After they were sold on, Russian company Lukoil employed the ships to move barrels of oil. The fleet became part of Russia’s so-called shadow network, used to evade sanctions imposed after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Although Ormerod disposed of the ships in 2023, he was nevertheless designated in 2025 as a UK-based national. His designation was removed on 2 March 2026, only weeks after he publicly condemned Russia’s actions in Ukraine. His lawyers said the listing left him unable to access funds to meet basic needs. Abigail Healey, a partner at Quillon Law acting for Ormerod, said the UK Foreign, Commonwealth &...
Recent shifts have influenced how public policy and reciprocity are construed, and how arbitral neutrality is evaluated. This synopsis briefly surveys the legal architecture and principal patterns visible in Russian enforcement practice since 2022. Legal framework for enforcement of foreign arbitral awards and judgements Russia is a Party to the 1958 Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention), which requires contracting states to acknowledge and execute arbitral awards issued or rendered in other contracting territories. Until 2022, Russian courts were largely seen as supportive of arbitration, though they occasionally at times applied an expansive view of public policy when declining recognition and enforcement. In addition, Russian law contains distinct specific rules addressing the enforcement of foreign court judgments. Under Article 241(1) of the Arbitrazh Procedure Code ( APC), decisions of foreign courts in disputes arising from...
Financial services developments Government fraud strategy for 2026-29 includes focus on APP fraud, cryptoassets and repealing SCA The Home Office has released its Fraud Strategy for 2026 to 2029, outlining how government intends to counter fraud affecting individuals and companies across the period. It highlights the Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA)’s intentions to prevent authorised push payment ( APP) fraud and money mule activity; the forthcoming cryptoasset framework due to take effect in October 2027; and HM Treasury ( HMT)’s proposal to revoke the current Strong Customer Authentication ( SCA) technical standards. The strategy signals a stronger emphasis on setting out clear illustrations of both effective and poor practice in addressing authorised fraud. Building on work already underway, the FCA will review methods for curbing APP fraud and mule activity, and will circulate its recommendations to the financial services sector overall over the...
Re Mannarest Ltd [2026] EWHC 326 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? So far as is currently known, this appears to be the first reported decision under IA 1986, Sch B1, para 38. The judgment emphasises the court’s (quite proper) prioritisation of creditors’ interests and questions the long-held orthodoxy that liquidation is the point of no return. It confirms that, when the circumstances align, liquidation is not necessarily terminal. IA 1986, Sch B1, para 38 now stands as a factor that must be firmly weighed in any rescue or restructuring exercise—particularly where, as in situations of this kind, preserving the company’s existence produces clear benefits and creditors’ interests are fully safeguarded. In such circumstances, the provision sits squarely among the considerations that inform rescue and restructuring strategies. What was the background?......
The UPC's Court of Appeal On 6 March 2026, the UPC’s Court of Appeal paused the patent infringement proceedings that Dyson Technology Ltd ( Dyson) had initiated against Hong- Kong-based rival hairdryer maker Dreame International ( Hongkong) Ltd ( Dreame) and a Spanish business acting in the EU as its ‘authorised representative’, in order to obtain guidance from the Court of Justice of the European Union on how the actions should progress. Dyson had requested that the UPC grant a preliminary injunction preventing Dreame from marketing hairdryers said by Dyson to infringe one of its patents across UPC territory, and also in Spain, which has never acceded to the EU’s patent court. The UPC’s Hamburg Division then issued an injunction restraining two Dreame companies, together with Eurep Gmb H ( Eurep) — described as an authorised representative for Dreame in Europe — from...
Leigh Day, acting for 24 migrant workers, said in a joint statement that the dispute has been resolved without Dyson accepting liability. The details of the agreement remain confidential. ‘ This outcome reflects the costs of litigation and the advantages of bringing matters to a close,’ the notice on the firm’s website stated. The 24 claimants, hailing from Nepal and Bangladesh, alleged they were trafficked from their homelands. They reported suffering exploitative, abusive labour and living arrangements whilst working for a third‑party supplier producing goods and parts for the Dyson Group, widely recognised for its vacuum cleaners. According to the workers, they were housed in cramped, unhygienic factory quarters and compelled to work in excess of 12 hours per day, for pay below the minimum wage......
EU financial services developments ECB issues Opinion on proposal to streamline the digital legislative framework The European Central Bank ( ECB) has issued an Opinion on the proposed regulation to simplify the Union’s digital legislative framework (the Digital Omnibus). The Opinion spans digital rules, data protection and incident reporting. Where the ECB suggests amendments, it supplies precise drafting in a separate technical working document, with an explanatory text appended at the end of the Opinion. On 9 December 2025, the ECB received a request from the European Parliament for an Opinion on a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations ( EU) 2016/679, ( EU) 2018/1724, ( EU) 2018/1725, ( EU) 2023/2854 and Directives 2002/58/ EC, ( EU) 2022/2555 and ( EU) 2022/2557 as regards the simplification of the digital legislative framework, and repealing Regulations ( EU)...
What is the background to the Act? In 2020 the Ministry of Justice tasked the Law Commission with examining the legal framework for crypto-tokens and other digital assets. That workstream, encompassing a review, consultation and a series of reports, resulted in recommendations for the Bill that became the Property ( Digital Assets etc) Act 2025. What does the Act do? Before the Property ( Digital Assets etc) Act 2025 commenced on 2 December 2025, English law recognised only two categories of personal property: ‘things in possession’: typically, tangible items such as a chattel; and ‘things in action’: generally, legal rights that are enforceable by court action. The Act’s aim and effect is to make clear that where there is a ‘thing’ (i.e. something not given a particular name) which does not fall within the established meanings of ‘thing in possession’ or ‘thing in action’, that alone does not...
What are the practical implications of this case? Section 110 of the German Code of Civil Procedure ( ZPO) obliges claimants domiciled outside the EU/ EEA, upon request, to furnish security for the respondent’s litigation costs. This rule also applies by analogy in proceedings for the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards and serves to shield respondents from the risk that a later costs award cannot be executed abroad. The FCJ has now clarified that where a treaty-based exemption is available (such as Article 17 of the 1954 Hague Convention on Civil Procedure) the assessment is purely formal. Under Section 110(2) No. 1 ZPO, the sole question is whether Germany remains internationally obliged to waive security for costs. Sanctions, political frictions, reciprocity concerns or expected enforcement hurdles overseas do not change that position. So long as the treaty is formally in force, the...
Gluck v Endzweig and another [2026] EWCA Civ 145 What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling is of immediate relevance to practitioners who draft or advise on arbitration clauses, especially where the nominated forum lies beyond the mainstream of institutional commercial arbitration. A Beth Din, a Sharia panel, or an analogous body may assume an ongoing pastoral or faith-based mandate to revisit its decisions—an assumption that directly clashes with the AA 1996 enforcement architecture. Parties seeking to refer disputes to such forums while still preserving the capacity to enforce any award must recognise that these aims are not invariably compatible. Any contractual power to correct or supplement should be time-limited: AA 1996, s 57(4) offers a sound template, allowing correction within twenty-eight days of the award date, or within any longer period the parties may agree. The court’s method of...
What are the practical implications of the case? In The Republic of India v CC Devas ( Mauritius) Ltd and others, the Commercial Court ruled on an application by the Republic of India under AA 1996, s 45. For practitioners, the significance lies in its examination (within an s 45 application) of how far a court may intervene in an ongoing investor-state arbitration. Against a backdrop the judgment called ‘complex and highly contentious’, the Commercial Court addressed whether it was constrained by the Tribunal’s procedural orders when determining who may consent to bringing an application under AA 1996, s 45. The Court held it was not constrained by those orders because, unlike the Tribunal—which had approached the question by reference to international law and the 1976 UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules as the arbitration’s substantive law—the English court was required to apply English law and English public...
Share your insights here What are the key changes introduced into the SBCC 2024 Contracts? The SBCC 2024 Contracts have been updated in line with the parallel Joint Contracts Tribunal ( JCT) standard forms used in England and Wales, amounting to ‘kilted versions’ of those JCT documents, with departures introduced to accommodate the distinct legal framework north and south of the border. Overall, the revisions are arranged around three central aims that mirror the approach taken for the corresponding JCT suite and clarify how Scottish practice aligns with, yet differs from, the position in England and Wales: capturing legislative developments since the 2016 editions; future proofing the forms; modernising and streamlining the drafting. Legislative changes For England and Wales, notable amendments to the JCT contracts respond to the Building Safety Act 2022, in particular Part 2A dealing with the regulation of higher-risk buildings. Where that statute has only a...
Share your insights here What changes have been made by OFSI to its guidance on financial sanctions enforcement and monetary penalties? The latest iteration of the guidance sets out four principal changes: Reworked case assessment process ( Chapter 5): The document now includes an 'indicative matrix' to gauge the gravity of a breach. This matrix aligns breach severity with specified aggravating and mitigating considerations. It identifies four tiers of seriousness. Breaches falling within level 3 (high) or level 4 (very high) are expected to attract monetary penalties, with baseline figures of up to 75% or 75–100% of the statutory maximum, respectively. Level 4 matters may additionally be passed to law enforcement for criminal investigation. A number of case factors have been introduced, altered, retitled or removed......
This piece explores how the FCA’s enforcement against HTX (the first action of its type) highlights the difficulty of policing a borderless cryptoasset sector from a single national base. It also signals how the FCA may scale its approach once cryptoassets sit fully inside the regulatory perimeter in 2027. Background HTX, known as Huobi until 2023, is a cryptocurrency exchange launched in 2013. Initially aligned with Chinese users, it shifted focus to worldwide markets, including the UK, after domestic rules tightened. In the UK, oversight of cryptoassets has progressed at a measured pace compared with other jurisdictions, which range from unrestrained openness to comprehensive prohibitions. Beyond an early move in January 2021 banning retail sales of crypto-derivatives, the first significant stride arrived in April 2022: all cryptoasset service providers operating in the UK had to register with the FCA under the Money...
MLex understands that the EU and Mexico have earmarked 21-22 May 2026 as the dates to sign their updated free trade accord. The reworked EU- Mexico arrangement, set to supersede the original 2000 pact, will widen market entry for goods and services, tighten disciplines on public procurement and investment safeguards, and intensify collaboration further on sustainable development and digital commerce. Representing the EU, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa are anticipated to fly to Mexico City to personally conclude the accord with President Claudia Sheinbaum, according to MLex......
Charge My Street Ltd v HMRC [2026] UKFTT 318 ( TC) VATA 1994, Sch 7A, Group 1, Note 5 states that supplies attract the reduced rate where they are always for domestic use. Note 5(g) concerns a supply of electricity to a person at any premises where the electricity—together with any other electricity delivered to that person at the premises by the same supplier—was not provided at a rate exceeding 1,000 kilowatt hours per month. HMRC argued that the phrase “to a person at any premises” means the supply must be made at that person’s own premises, which must include a building. The FTT rejected that interpretation, explaining that: on its ordinary, natural construction the requirement is that......
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
