Featured documents
This Practice Note outlines the law concerning criminal recklessness. The subjective test for recklessness Certain statutory and common law offences allow the prosecution to prove mens rea through ‘recklessness’. Put simply, recklessness is where the accused takes an unjustified risk that results in unlawful harm or damage. The House of Lords in R v G reaffirmed the subjective approach to recklessness. Before R v G, two distinct tests were used, depending on the offence charged: Subjective recklessness from R v Cunningham: the prosecution had to establish that the accused personally foresaw the risk. Objective recklessness from R v Caldwell: the prosecution only needed to show that the risk would have been obvious to a reasonable person, without proving the accused themselves foresaw it. In R v G, the House of Lords concluded that the objective test could operate unfairly where a defendant did not foresee the
This Practice Note examines the remedy of rescission, explaining when and in what manner a contract can be unwound (at common law, in equity and under statute) and thereby terminated and brought to an end. It covers the consequences and effects of rescission, the principal grounds for setting aside an agreement (misrepresentation, mistake, undue influence, duress, non‑disclosure, fiduciary misdealing and bribery) and the main obstacles to claiming rescission—affirmation, the intervention of third‑party rights and the impossibility of restitution. For further guidance on rescission in the context of misrepresentation, see Practice Note: Misrepresentation—rescission as a remedy. There are many ways in which a contract may reach its end; see: Terminating contracts—how and when a contract ends—overview for a brief and accessible summary, with links to the related further practical guidance, including Practice Note: Termination and expiry of contracts. For a table
What is a res judicata? A res judicata is a determination by a court or tribunal with jurisdiction over the cause of action and the parties, which finally disposes of the issues decided so they cannot be litigated again by those bound, save on appeal. Final judgments entered by default or by consent fall within this concept, whereas rulings on purely procedural points and any decision lacking finality do not. The doctrine’s aim is to bring litigation to an end and shield parties from being harassed by the same dispute twice. in personam—binds the parties and their privies in rem—binds all persons, privy or otherwise (ie a judgment binding the whole world) A party may rely on res judicata: as an estoppel to defeat an opponent’s claim or defence; and/or as the basis of their own claim or
The offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent Wounding or causing grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent can be tried solely in the Crown Court on indictment. Elements of the offence Under the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (OATPA 1861), the prosecution must establish that the defendant unlawfully and maliciously: wounded with the intention of causing GBH, or caused GBH with that intention, or wounded intending to resist or prevent the lawful arrest or detention of any person, or caused GBH intending to resist or prevent the lawful arrest or detention of any person ‘Unlawfully’ and ‘maliciously’ Unlawfully The wounding or causing of GBH must be unlawful. Such conduct may be lawful if used: in self-defence in defence of another in defence of property for the prevention of crime where the victim gave express or implied consent For further information on these defences, see below:
Most recent Practice notes
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained . NOTE: On 5 September 2023, CIETAC unveiled revisions ( Revisions) to its 2015 arbitration rules, responding to growing demands for agility and effectiveness in the digital age and developments in international arbitration practice, following a revision plan initiated in April 2021. Covering more than 30 articles, the Revisions address: Digital case management Multi-tiered arbitration agreements Jurisdiction Multi-contract arbitrations Arbitral procedures Other challenging issues The Revisions take effect on 1 January 2024 and apply to all CIETAC arbitrations commenced from that date. CIETAC’s current arbitration rules have been in force since 1 January 2015 (the CIETAC Rules 2015). This Practice Note is UNDER REVIEW—it presently reflects CIETAC’s structure and role as set out in the CIETAC Rules 2015. It covers arbitration under the CIETAC Arbitration Rules 2015 ( CIETAC Rules), which...
This Practice Note sets out guidance on initiating ad hoc arbitration proceedings under the Arbitration Act 1996 ( AA 1996). Prior to starting the arbitration Arbitration proceedings ought not to be commenced without first carefully evaluating the potential consequences and risks of entering a formal dispute resolution process. Practice Note: The role of in-house counsel in international arbitration offers practical guidance on key considerations for in-house counsel, and those advising them, in relation to pre-arbitration issues. The scope for settlement of the parties’ dispute should likewise be weighed at the pre-arbitration stage—see Practice Note: Settlement in arbitration. Before commencing arbitration, the parties and their lawyers should also carefully review the applicable dispute resolution provisions and consider whether there is any contractual obligation to undertake mediation or any other form of ADR procedure before referring the dispute to arbitration. It is common for dispute...
Introduction This Practice Note serves as a handbook to arbitration conducted by the International and Ibero- American Arbitration Center of Madrid (‘ CIIAM’ or the ‘ Center’) (formerly CIAM- CIAR) pursuant to its arbitration rules effective from 1 January 2024 (the Arbitration Rules). It focuses on the issuance of awards, the assessment and apportionment of costs, and the ways in which proceedings can be brought to a close. Time limit for rendering awards The Arbitration Rules set timetable parameters that marry predictability with sufficient flexibility. They differentiate between standard proceedings and accelerated options (‘abbreviated procedure’ and ‘highly expedited procedure’). The Center oversees adherence to time limits, and arbitrators’ timeliness may influence both applications for extensions and the setting of fees ( Arts 4.5, 49.1, and institutional guidance on award scrutiny). In ordinary proceedings, unless the parties stipulate otherwise, tribunals must issue awards on the merits within three months after the...
Introduction This Practice Note provides guidance on arbitrations administered by the International and Ibero- American Arbitration Center of Madrid (‘ CIIAM’ or the ‘ Center’)—formerly CIAM- CIAR—under its Arbitration Rules effective from 1 January 2024. It reviews the main steps to commence and organise a CIIAM arbitration: from lodging the request and appointing arbitrators, to standards on independence, challenges, the possible designation of an arbitral secretary, and the provisions dealing with default and the continuation of the proceedings. Request for arbitration and answer CIIAM proceedings commence when the request for arbitration is filed with the Center, which may be submitted by email to solicitudes@ciiam.org. This filing opens the case file, sets out the essential particulars and, where appropriate, names the claimant’s co-arbitrator where a three-member tribunal is contemplated. The Arbitration Rules set out the minimum contents and the mandatory annexes. As a minimum, the request should...
Introduction This Practice Note outlines arbitration proceedings administered by the International and Ibero- American Arbitration Centre of Madrid (‘ CIIAM’ or the ‘ Centre’) (formerly CIAM- CIAR) under the arbitration rules effective from 1 January 2024 (the Arbitration Rules). It concentrates on the expedited and emergency options for international disputes connected to Spain, the triggers for their use, timetable requirements, and practical conduct to ensure enforceability. Abbreviated procedure The abbreviated procedure aims to dispose of lower-value cases through a simplified route while safeguarding the right of defence. It is governed by Article 53 of the Arbitration Rules. Scope of application and activation The abbreviated procedure applies automatically when the aggregate amount in dispute (claim and, where relevant, counterclaim) does not exceed €1 million. The parties may nevertheless disapply it by express agreement, or the Centre may decline to use it if a party lodges a reasoned...
This Practice Note is confined to arbitration conducted under the revised CIETAC Arbitration Rules 2024 ( CIETAC Rules). As a general proposition, the 2024 CIETAC Rules apply to arbitrations accepted by CIETAC on or after 1 January 2024, or where the parties have opted to adopt the CIETAC Arbitration Rules 2024 ( CIETAC, art 88). The 2015 rules remain applicable to arbitrations accepted by CIETAC between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2023. For help on the CIETAC Rules 2015, see: CIETAC arbitration—overview. This Practice Note relates to international or foreign‑related disputes, or disputes linked to Hong Kong SAR, Macao SAR or the Taiwan region ( CIETAC, art 3.2). CIETAC has separate provisions for domestic arbitration, which are excluded from this Note. There are also distinct provisions for arbitrations administered by the CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Center ( CIETAC, art 76), which are not...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained NOTE: On 5 September 2023, CIETAC announced new revisions ( Revisions) to its 2015 arbitration rules, prompted by the growing demand for flexibility and efficiency in the digital era and shifts in international arbitration practice, following a revision programme launched in April 2021. Extending across more than 30 articles, the Revisions address digital case management, tiered arbitration agreements, jurisdiction, multi-contract arbitrations, arbitral procedures and other complex issues. The Revisions will come into force on 1 January 2024 and will apply to all CIETAC arbitrations commenced from that date. CIETAC’s current arbitration rules have been in effect since 1 January 2015 (the CIETAC Rules 2015). This Practice Note is UNDER REVIEW—it presently reflects CIETAC’s structure and role as set out in the CIETAC Rules 2015. This Practice Note relates to...
This Practice Note outlines how the People's Republic of China ( PRC) ( China) approaches state immunity, setting out the stance taken on immunity matters. For a general introduction and overview of state immunity and arbitration, see Practice Note: State immunity and arbitration—general considerations. For Practice Notes covering state immunity across numerous jurisdictions around the world, in particular including England and Wales, consult our ‘ State immunity’ subtopic: State immunity and arbitration—overview. Note: Chinese and Hong Kong court judgments mentioned in this Practice Note are not reported by Lexis Nexis® UK. State immunity—definition, concepts and approaches State immunity (also known as sovereign immunity) is a concept in public international law describing relationships and dealings involving sovereign states, frequently invoked by states or state‑owned enterprises ( SOEs) when making jurisdictional challenges or attempting to resist enforcement against their assets. A solid grasp of sovereign immunity is...
Recent years have seen notable progress in the Sultanate of Oman (‘ Oman’), marked by the launch of the Oman Commercial Arbitration Centre (‘ OAC’) in 2018 (created by Royal Decree No. 26 of 2018) and the publication of its Arbitration Rules in 2020 ( OAC Decision No. 8 of 2020). For proceedings seated in Oman, the Oman Arbitration Act ( Royal Decree No. 47 of 1997, as amended) serves as the lex arbitri, having come into effect on 28 June 1997 and later revised in 2007. The Oman Arbitration Act draws upon the UNCITRAL Model Law. It is further complemented by the Civil Procedure Law ( Royal Decree No. 29 of 2002) and by Oman’s adoption of the New York Convention ( Royal Decree No. 36 of 1998). Under Article 22 of the Oman Arbitration Act, the arbitral tribunal is...
This Practice Note considers challenges to the jurisdiction of arbitral tribunals under the Arbitration Law of the People’s Republic of China ( PRC) (the Arbitration Law). This Practice Note has been revised to reflect the 2025 amendments, taking effect on 1 March 2026, by the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China. All citations to provisions of the Arbitration Law are to the amended law. Disputes over a Chinese arbitral institution’s competence commonly turn on whether the arbitration agreement is binding. Under Article 5 of the Arbitration Law (as amended in 2025), arbitral tribunals have exclusive competence to hear disputes where the parties ‘have concluded an arbitration agreement’. Correspondingly, Article 5 also restrains PRC courts from taking jurisdiction ‘unless the arbitration agreement is null and void’. Accordingly, a jurisdictional objection typically targets the validity and binding effect of the parties’...
This Practice Note collates links to the rules and model clauses from a wide range of institutional and ad hoc organisations, spanning prominent and lesser-known arbitral institutions, organisations and industry bodies. Where relevant, it likewise points to content on the organisations themselves. Links to content on the organisations are provided where applicable. The table below is illustrative rather than exhaustive, and other institutions or organisations offer alternative clauses. Institutional arbitration American Arbitration Association ( AAA)—see: AAA arbitration—overview; AAA rules; AAA model clauses. Baltic and International Maritime Council ( BIMCO)— N/ A; BIMCO model clauses. Chambre Arbitrale Maritime de Paris ( CAMP)— CAMP rules; CAMP model clauses—see Precedent: Chambre Arbitrale Maritime de Paris ( CAMP) model arbitration clause. China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission ( CIETAC)—see: CIETAC...
Arbitration-related legislation— England and Wales Arbitration Act 1996, as amended by the Arbitration Act 2025 Administration of Justice Act 1970 Civil Procedure Rules 1998, SI 1998/3132 ( CPR) Evidence ( Proceedings in other Jurisdictions) Act 1975 Foreign Limitation Periods Act 1984 Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 Judgments Act 1838 Limitation Act 1980 State Immunity Act 1978 Unfair Arbitration Agreements ( Specified Amount) Order 1999, SI 1999/2167 Consumer Rights Act 2015 Arbitration-related court forms N8 Claim Form ( Arbitration) N8A Notes for Claimant on Claim Form ( Arbitration) N8B Notes for Defendant on Arbitration Claim N9 Response Pack N15 Acknowledgment of Service ( Arbitration) N210( CC) Acknowledgment of Service ( Part 8) N215 Certificate of Service ......
Updated to reflect amendments to the Arbitration Act 1996 ( AA 1996) introduced by the Arbitration Act 2025 ( AA 2025), this Practice Note treats all references to the AA 1996 as references to the Act in its amended form. The AA 2025 took effect on 1 August 2025. Arbitration Act 2025 commencement and transitional provisions Practice Note: AA 1996—challenging an arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction in court (pre-award)—procedure (s 32) Practice Note: AA 1996—challenging and appealing arbitral awards in the English court The Note explores the grounds on which an arbitral tribunal's substantive jurisdiction can be disputed before an award is made, under the AA 1996 in force in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The principle of kompetenz-kompetenz AA 1996, s 30(1) embeds the principle of kompetenz-kompetenz (also termed competence-competence) in English arbitration law......
Decision making The Arbitral Tribunal may issue distinct awards on various matters at varying stages and times, as needed ( Rule 41.1). Where the Arbitral Tribunal comprises more than one arbitrator, any award or determination is resolved by a majority. If no majority can be reached, the presiding arbitrator will decide the award or determination alone, independently ( Rule 41.2). Form An award is final and binding upon the parties ( Rule 41.3)......
Arbitration under the Abu Dhabi Commercial Conciliation & Arbitration Centre ( ADCCAC) 2013 Procedural Regulations of Arbitration (the 2013 Regulations) Proceedings governed by the Abu Dhabi Commercial Conciliation & Arbitration Centre ( ADCCAC) Procedural Regulations of Arbitration 2013 (the 2013 Regulations) take place before a tribunal (the Panel). Under article 8, the Panel must comprise an odd number of arbitrators and may consist of one or more members. Where the parties have not fixed the size of the tribunal, the default is appointment of a sole arbitrator, unless the ADCCAC Centre (the Centre) decides—having regard to the amount, nature, or circumstances of the dispute—that more than one arbitrator should be named (see: Arbitrating under the ADCCAC Regulations 2013— Roles and definitions). This Practice Note relies on the ‘official’ English text of the 2013 Regulations. There are inconsistencies between the Arabic and English versions...
Arbitration clauses Arbitration clauses stipulate that disputes are resolved by a constituted arbitral tribunal and may appear in both domestic and international settings. An arbitration clause may, or may not, nominate an institution—such as the International Chamber of Commerce ( ICC) or the London Court of International Arbitration ( LCIA)—to administer the case under its own rules or other rules. A clause may equally call for proceedings that are not institutionally administered but are conducted in line with established procedural rules, for example the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. In practice, most ad hoc arbitrations proceed under the UNCITRAL Rules because they offer a recognised and well-tested framework for the conduct of proceedings. A further advantage of adopting the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules is the provision for an appointing authority to constitute the arbitral tribunal, enabling the arbitration to move forward where a respondent attempts to stymie the...
The AAA and the origins of the Established in 1926, the American Arbitration Association ( AAA) is a not-for-profit public service organisation delivering dispute resolution services. Its offerings include: mediation domestic and international arbitration For arbitrations, the AAA has developed several sets of rules. The most widely used—and the focus of this Practice Note—are the Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures, which encompass the Procedures for Large, Complex Commercial Disputes. These are known as the Commercial Rules and were amended with effect from 1 September 2022. A Fee Schedule applies to arbitrations under the Commercial Rules (effective 1 May 2018). Recognising rapid technological progress (eg generative AI) in arbitration, the AAA has launched a web centre to help AAA users navigate these changes. AAAi Lab gives AAA users, in-house counsel and law firms, and arbitrators access to: policy guidance ...
Introduction The 2026 AIAC Rules mark a notable step forward from the 2023 AIAC Rules. Whereas the 2023 framework incorporated the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (revised in 2021), the 2026 edition moves away from that approach. Consequently, the 2026 AIAC Rules now function as a more unified, self-contained rule set and introduce the principal changes outlined below... AIAC Court of Arbitration A key reform in the 2026 AIAC Rules is the creation of the AIAC Court of Arbitration, led by a President and supported by a Registrar. This replaces the Director-focused structure of the 2023 AIAC Rules. Under the new arrangement, core responsibilities—such as appointing arbitrators, deciding challenges, and determining consolidation—are entrusted to the AIAC Court and/or its President. The Registrar manages the day-to-day conduct of arbitrations. This clear separation of roles brings the AIAC in line with governance models used by other leading...
This Practice Note on multiple tortfeasors examines liability where a tortious claim involves more than one defendant or prospective defendant. It considers the same damage, same act (joint tortfeasor) concept, when directors may incur liability, accessory liability and knowledge in tort, and practical aspects of pleading such claims or preparing an agreement to settle them. For guidance on wider multi-party liability issues, see the following Practice Notes: Vicarious liability and multi-party torts Joint, several, and joint and several liability Contribution claims under Civil Liability ( Contribution) Act 1978 Settling disputes—claims involving three or more parties Multiple tortfeasors—the different categories of tortfeasor Where more than one tortfeasor (a party responsible for a tort) is involved, they may fall into these categories: joint tortfeasors: the parties answer for the same damage arising from the same tortious act several...
This Practice Note sets out, at a high level and in a table-style format, the core distinctions between arbitration and other forms of alternative dispute resolution ( ADR), namely: mediation, early neutral evaluation, adjudication and expert determination. Procedure Arbitration Mediation Early Neutral Evaluation Adjudication Expert Determination Flexibility Arbitration: Adaptable procedure with geographical mobility. See Practice Note: A quick guide to arbitration process. Mediation: Highly flexible; the process can be tailored on the day. Early Neutral Evaluation: Entirely flexible. Adjudication: Flexible, though parties usually agree certain exchanges of documents. Expert Determination: Flexible, though parties usually agree certain exchanges of documents. Delay Arbitration: Delays can arise, particularly when the tribunal is constituted and sometimes during the proceedings. These can be mitigated by agreement and active case management. A procedure for speedy judgment exists but depends on a robust tribunal. Mediation: Parties generally agree a specific mediation date and make appropriate...
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
