Legal News

The pioneering role of the gaming industry Virtual goods and digital assets now originate, are bought and exchanged entirely online. They commonly mirror real-world products and services—virtually any item or offering found offline can be conceived in a digital guise. Unlike physical counterparts, however, a virtual item can be upgraded, altered and enriched with fresh functionality. Within gaming, such goods have long appeared as in‑game items: skins, outfits, accessories, gear and weapons for avatars. With blockchain, these assets can be made unique and their allocation or ownership recorded transparently, preventing double sales, enabling trading beyond a single game’s closed economy, and streamlining monetisation by tracking royalties on secondary transactions. Studios are already committing serious resources to tokenised assets. In up‑and‑coming worlds like Decentraland and The Sandbox, players can purchase, sell and develop parcels of virtual land with digital buildings. Ubisoft is rolling out NFTs in its...

Edward Cumming Bruce v Revenue and Customs [2022] UKUT 233 ( TCC) Following the Court of Appeal’s decision in Mansworth v Jelley [2002] EWCA Civ 1829, together with an associated HMRC press release in January 2003, the taxpayer sought to claim capital losses by making in-time amendments to previously submitted tax returns. He wrote to HMRC enclosing revised computations of losses realised on the disposal of shares acquired under an adjustable share option scheme, together with detailed changes to the capital gains tax ( CGT) calculation pages in the relevant returns. HMRC opened enquiries into the relevant returns pursuant to TMA 1970, s 9A, and later closed those enquiries on the footing that the asserted losses were not allowable. The question on appeal focused on whether the taxpayer’s notifications of capital losses were free-standing claims or whether they formed part of his tax...

What are the practical implications of this case? Braceurself Ltd v NHS England [2022] EWHC 1532 ( TCC) underlines key lessons for both sides of a procurement dispute. For advisers to disappointed tenderers, it indicates that pursuing a broad challenge on multiple grounds can be a sound strategy where even a small upward tweak to scoring might have decisively changed the result. For contracting authorities, it is a sobering reminder that, even in a process that is otherwise well organised and meticulously planned (as acknowledged by Mr Nissen QC), evaluators must accurately grasp the substance of a bidder’s reply and must not allow irrelevant factors to influence the mark awarded. Further, Mr Nissen QC confirmed the correct judicial approach when claims of manifest error are advanced against an authority. Following the reasoning of Mr Justice Fraser in Bechtel Ltd v High Speed Two ( HS2) Ltd...

HMRC has now revised form IHT409, employed alongside form IHT400 when the deceased had received or had...

Re Wotherspoon (in bankruptcy); Hinton (as trustee in bankruptcy of John Wotherspoon) v Gillian Wotherspoon [2022] EWHC 2083 ( Ch), [2022] All ER ( D) 67 ( Aug) What are the practical implications of this case? It is axiomatic that, in nearly every claim, the claimant or applicant bears the burden of proof. That principle equally applies to office-holders pursuing antecedent transaction claims. Pre-bankruptcy dealings between a would-be bankrupt and a spouse or close associate may tempt an office-holder to infer an improper motive and press a claim. This decision squarely reminds insolvency practitioners and lawyers that, even if the recipient’s or bankrupt’s account seems doubtful, there must still be contemporaneous material from which the case can be proved. That is especially significant under IA 1986, s 423, where an improper purpose must be demonstrated and not merely presumed in light of the...

With the global shift towards net zero, a swell of lawsuits targeting firms that misrepresent their offerings as green is looming. However, although the UK watchdog has repeatedly vowed to tackle ‘greenwashing’, including through enforcement, the law does not invariably favour the Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA). As environmental activists and disgruntled investors bring claims against businesses for overstating the sustainability of their products, the regulator’s capacity to intervene will seem ever more constrained unless its powers are strengthened. Without stronger powers, the regulator’s ability to act will look increasingly reduced, particularly as allegations accumulate and claimants press for action against exaggerated sustainability claims. Activity on sustainable finance is progressing at pace in the UK. In November 2020, the government was first to unveil mandatory climate-risk reporting. By the close of 2023, major financial institutions and listed corporates must publish...

Wright v Mc Cormack [2022] EWHC 2068 ( QB) (01 August 2022) What are the practical implications of this case? This is (hopefully) a one-off matter and a timely prompt for litigants to carefully check the accuracy and truthfulness of their pleadings and any witness material they intend to rely upon at trial. Although the claimant obtained damages, the judgment was notably scathing, particularly in finding that he had advanced a ‘deliberately false’ case about disinvitations from academic conferences. The claimant had sought to use those disinvitations to argue that the words complained of caused serious harm to his reputation. The court noted that, because serious harm bears on quantum, the inaccuracies surrounding the disinvitations were central to the claim. The case also stands as a stark warning that any errors within a case should be squarely addressed. The court found that the...

Oceanfill Ltd v Nuffield Health and Cannons Group Ltd [2022] EWHC 2178 ( Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision may offer reassurance to commercial landlords anxious about tenants attempting to cram down landlord claims under the new CA 2006, Pt 26A, especially after the High Court sanctioned the Virgin Active plan. Under Pt 26A—specifically CA 2006, s 901G—the court can approve a plan even where not all creditor classes support it, via a cross-class cram-down, provided at least one class has agreed and that no member would fare worse under the relevant alternative (ie the most likely outcome if the plan were not approved). For landlords holding AGAs—and it is worth reviewing historic title documents, as the AGA here dated back around twenty years—it is reassuring that such guarantees are not automatically stripped of value in exactly the...

Under section 47(6) of The Building Act 1984, approved inspectors were previously obliged to hold specified minimum insurance, with mandatory run-off cover arranged under a scheme approved by the secretary of state; they are now permitted instead to obtain revised levels of professional indemnity insurance on the open market. The reform was introduced to prevent an insurance crisis after the Grenfell Tower tragedy, which had caused many approved inspectors to cease trading and led insurers to stop writing the risk. Since private certification of buildings was introduced in England and Wales in 1984, approved inspectors have consistently struggled to secure adequate insurance. As private building control inspectors lack the financial strength of local authorities, which are permanent statutory bodies, a fundamental feature of the private certification regime was to require private inspectors to carry sufficient cover, ensuring house purchasers had...

FACT has released research carried out by Opentext Security Solutions into the risks posed by illegal sports streaming sites. The study shows these platforms expose fans to financial fraud, harmful scams and explicit material. It further concludes that users are 'bombarded' with threats such as crypto scams, extreme or explicit pop-ups, and banking trojans, with the latter deemed the most dangerous hazard for viewers, according to the research findings published by FACT......

What is the likely outcome going to be once the government e-scooter trials end? Following the Queen’s Speech, we anticipated e-scooters would appear in the Transport Bill, and Grant Shapps suggested privately owned models could be permitted on the roads. Yet, with the Conservative leadership contest ongoing, we will not know until early September 2022 who will be prime minister or transport secretary. We still expect private e-scooters to be legalised, but the detail must wait for the new government. Safe legalisation demands firm rules and protection for those injured by riders, ideally through compulsory third party insurance. Any framework should set clear standards, including: Maximum power Speed limits Lights and indicators The government must also determine how it will enforce any new rules, given current difficulties tackling illegal use of privately owned e-scooters. How will this affect personal injury claims...

The Jersey Financial Services Commission ( JFSC) imposed a £498,000 financial penalty on 4 August 2022 on Lloyds Bank Corporate Markets plc’s Jersey branch in the Channel Island of Jersey for having treated a correspondent bank as an ordinary commercial client between 2008 and 2020. The outcome was disclosed on 12 August 2022. Consequently, according to the island’s regulator, Lloyds failed to implement the heightened controls required under Jersey’s AML regulations. Correspondent banks deliver services to other lenders to facilitate transactions and generally do not have a direct link to the customers behind those payments, which makes it difficult for them to confirm information or carry out due diligence. The head of the Jersey branch, Alasdair Gardner, acknowledged the commission’s conclusions, accepting that falling short of the rules governing the management of the correspondent banking relationship was...

The EU plans to reinforce its cybersecurity regime through a second Network and Information Security Directive ( NIS2) (see: LNB News 03/12/2021 49). Alongside this, the UK’s Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport ( DCMS) is consulting on legislative updates intended to bolster the UK’s cyber resilience (see: LNB News 21/06/2022 41). What are the key changes proposed by the EU for NIS2? The current Network and Information Systems Directive, Directive ( EU) 2016/1148 ( NIS1), applied in the EU (including the UK) from May 2018. NIS1 focuses on boosting resilience and raising cybersecurity standards for organisations delivering essential services across sectors (for example, energy), and also oversees certain digital service providers, though to a lesser extent. Within the EU, NIS2 will supersede NIS1. The Council of the EU has released a press statement outlining the principal changes put forward by NIS2, as...

Trentside Manor Care Home v Raphael [2022] EAT 37 What are the practical implications of this judgment? Privilege—procedure This ruling confirms that, where there is a live issue about whether documents attract privilege and must be disclosed, employment tribunals should refrain from making orders compelling disclosure to the opposing side’s representatives until privilege has been determined, and parties are not obliged to comply with any such orders in the meantime. This is because privilege, when it applies, protects the holder from having to reveal the contents of those documents to anyone at all. The EAT also noted that, in a privilege dispute, the proper procedural first step is for the party asserting privilege to provide a sworn statement setting out the basis of the claim and, without compromising the privilege, supplying as much precise information as can be given about the nature of the...

Vardy v Rooney and another [2022] EWHC 2017 ( QB) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision will attract attention as a concrete application of the truth defence, and for Steyn J’s conclusion that the public interest defence failed. It also clarifies the contours of the defences advanced in modern media litigation before the court. It further demonstrates the court’s readiness to make inferential findings of fact where: primary evidence is absent, or has been intentionally lost or destroyed journalists move to set aside witness summonses and disclosure orders by relying on source protection: see section 10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, and where waivers of source protection under that provision have been given ( Mrs Vardy) or given and then withdrawn ( Ms Watt) Mrs Vardy did not witness‑summon her ‘close friend and agent’, Ms Watt, who was by any measure a...

Thurrock Council v Stokes [2022] EWHC 1998 ( QB) What are the practical implications of this case? At paras [369]–[410], Nicklin J delivers a thorough survey of the authorities on injunctions under TCPA 1990, s 187B, providing a useful point of reference for practitioners. The judgment also explains the court’s methodology when considering such relief. Section 187B(2) empowers the court to grant whatever injunction it considers appropriate to restrain breaches of planning control. At [415], Nicklin J stressed that no injunction should be made against an individual unless the evidence justifies it and the court is satisfied the order is both necessary and proportionate. Although this may seem self-evident, a court will not make a wide, restrictive order without proof that it is required and balanced. In this case, Thurrock failed to establish either requirement. At [424], Nicklin J remarked that the best route to a...

The question Take, for instance, an impugned decision made on 1 January. If you file on 1 April 2022, are you in time, or do you need to file by 31 March? The short answer It is very likely that the ‘corresponding date rule’ applies, so a JR of a decision taken on 1 January must be lodged on or before 1 April. The long answer What is the ‘corresponding date rule’? Put briefly, the rule treats “three months after” 1 January as 1 April. Lord Diplock explained this in Dodds v Walker [1981] 1 WLR 1027, [1981] 2 All ER 609. The case concerned the time limit in section 29(3) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 ( LTA 1954), which required an application to be made “not less than two nor more than four months after the giving of the landlord’s notice”. The landlord’s notice was given on 30...

Altrad Services Ltd and Robert Wiseman and Sons Ltd v HMRC [2022] UKUT 185 ( TCC) The taxpayers (referred to as Cape and Wiseman before the FTT) implemented schemes intended to ‘step up’ the capital allowances available to them on assets they already held. Put simply, they transferred the assets to a bank, the bank leased them back to the taxpayers for a brief period of three or four weeks, and afterwards the bank transferred the assets back to the taxpayers by way of a sale. Relying on a quirk in the statutory rules (later rectified by the Finance Act 2011), the taxpayers argued that, for capital allowances purposes, they were not required to recognise any disposal value on that first sale of the assets, but......

Background The UKIPO’s first call for evidence on AI and IP, running from 7 September to 30 November 2020, aimed to gather answers to numerous questions across patents, copyright, trade marks, designs and trade secrets. Feedback to that exercise highlighted concerns about the balance in the copyright regime between safeguarding human-created works and those produced by AI. Regarding patents, participants flagged potential obstacles to innovation as reliance on AI systems grows. For further details on that process, see News Analysis: Call for views on AI and IP—the UK government response. Building on those findings, the UKIPO opened an additional consultation to probe the key matters in greater depth. The resulting government response was issued on 28 June 2022 (see: LNB News 28/06/2022 48), and is considered below. Copyright and computer-generated works ( CGWs) The initial question for government was whether creations generated by a...

Abbott and others v Ministry of Defence [2022] EWHC 1807 ( QB) What are the practical implications of this case? Practitioners acting for a cohort of claimants, each with distinct claims and fact patterns, should think carefully before placing the whole cohort on a single claim form. They must assess whether all claims can be conveniently resolved within one set of proceedings, considering both the size of the cohort and the extent of overlap between cases. A shared defendant and a handful of common issues will not, by themselves, justify a bulk claim form. Industrial disease actions featuring differing exposure periods and circumstances are particularly unlikely to be suitable for collective disposal in one action. Where any uncertainty exists, separate claim forms must be filed and individual court fees paid. This demands robust administrative processes to avoid missing limitation deadlines and brings...