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
1. What is the applicable legislation? The main legislation applicable to foreign investment comprises Kuwait Direct Investment Promotion Authority Law 116/2013 ( FDI Law 2013) together with Ministerial Decision 502/2014 issuing the Executive Regulations to implement Law 116/2013 on promoting direct investment in the State of Kuwait. Beyond these core FDI instruments, several other enactments may apply depending on how the investment is structured. Chief among these are the Companies Law 1/2016, the Capital Markets Authority Law 7/2010, and the Commercial Agencies Law 13/2016, alongside their respective executive regulations. In broad terms, Kuwait’s FDI framework is still relatively undeveloped. The system largely follows a traditional model for supervising foreign investment, concentrating on prohibiting non-nationals from conducting or funding certain activities, or on imposing heightened regulatory obligations on overseas investors. A comprehensive FDI screening mechanism, of the type found in many EU...
1. What is the applicable legislation? Pakistan is a federation in which certain subjects are devolved to the provinces, while others remain under the legislative competence of the federal government. Following the 18th Amendment to the Constitution of 1973, the Federal Legislative List identifies the subjects on which the federation is competent to legislate, with other matters legislated by the provinces. The scope of this Q& A is limited to the overall investment regime applicable to foreign investors, with a primary focus on federal legislation. Sectoral and provincial laws may apply in addition to those referenced below, and it is pivotal to obtain professional advice tailored to the nature of the investment being made. Pakistan’s investment policy framework is generally open to foreign investment and, subject to sector‑specific...
Introduction This Practice Note provides an overview of the Competition and Markets Authority’s ( CMA) guidance on how the Chapter I prohibition in the Competition Act 1998 ( CA 1998) applies to horizontal agreements (the Horizontal Guidance). The Horizontal Guidance supersedes the European Commission Guidelines on Horizontal Cooperation Agreements, which no longer have effect in the UK. Where relevant, this Practice Note also signposts the Competition Act 1998 ( Vertical Agreements Block Exemption) Order 2022 ( VABEO) and the CMA’s guidance on that regime ( VABEO Guidance). NOTE- The Horizontal Guidance contains a high-level outline of the block exemptions for research and development ( R& D) and specialisation agreements, which took effect on 1 January 2023. These exemptions are only summarised in this Practice Note. Sustainability is excluded from the Horizontal Guidance; it is addressed in separate guidance and is not covered...
The table sets out concluded Competition and Markets Authority ( CMA) phase 1 merger investigations, together with concluded Office of Fair Trading ( OFT) merger investigations, from June 2013 onwards. For updates on live investigations, see UK mergers—ongoing cases tracker. For finalised phase 2 inquiries, consult UK phase 2 mergers—closed cases tracker. For information on appeals, refer to UK competition appeals—ongoing cases tracker......
The grid below outlines notification thresholds in line with local legislation across all merger control regimes worldwide, together with additional key jurisdictional details to assess whether merger control filings are necessary, in addition to headline procedural points on timing, whether notifications are compulsory, and whether completion should be suspended or held in abeyance pending clearance for ease of reference. We have sought to balance ease of use and accuracy with fidelity to the original source material, using standardised phrases to condense legal threshold tests whilst preserving essential terms; a key appears below explaining the common phrases adopted to summarise threshold tests (e.g. the meaning of ‘combined turnover’ and that this requirement could be fulfilled by a single party) – see Key and useful information below. We also recommend consulting the merger guides and the underlying law for the precise wording and for further details on the...
Framework This Practice Note offers practical guidance on the UK competition law landscape for major online platforms, drawing principally on Part 1 of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 ( DMCCA 2024). DMCCA 2024 secured Royal Assent on 24 May 2024, and the digital markets provisions discussed in this Practice Note, set out in DMCCA 2024, Pt 1, entered into force on 1 January 2025 by means of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 ( Commencement No 1 and Savings and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2024, SI 2024/1226 (see: LNB News 28/11/2024 7). DMCCA 2024 introduced: a digital competition regime for digital markets in the UK ( Digital Competition Regime) reforms to the UK competition regime via amendments to the Competition Act 1998 ( CA 1998) and the Enterprise Act 2002 ( En A 2002) enhanced consumer...
CASE HUB See further, timeline. Case facts Summary of the European Commission’s FSR probe into CECONOMY AG’s planned purchase of JD.com, Inc. The deal presents vertical overlaps linked to the supply of consumer electronics and home appliances... Latest developments On 28 May 2026, the Commission sent the transaction to a phase II review. It is concerned that JD.com, Inc. may have received foreign subsidies that could distort the EU internal market... Parties JD.com, Inc ( JD.com): Headquartered in the Cayman Islands, JD.com is a holding company overseeing a group that operates a retail business......
The below tracks live European Commission merger investigations. For details on closed investigations, see EU phase I mergers—closed cases tracker and EU phase II mergers—closed cases tracker. For details of closed EU merger enforcement actions, see EU mergers enforcement actions—closed cases tracker. NOTE—completed merger investigations are removed from this document to the closed-case trackers within seven days of the final decision of the Commission. For details of appeals before the General Court, see the General Court appeals—ongoing cases tracker. For details of appeals before the Court of Justice, see Court of Justice appeals—ongoing cases tracker......
1. What is the applicable legislation? Morocco has no standalone foreign direct investment ( FDI) statute. Instead, the framework for both domestic and foreign investment is found in the Investment Charter. In December 2022, the previous charter was replaced by a new Investment Charter enacted through Framework Law 03-22 ( Investment Charter 2022). Neither the former nor the current Investment Charter creates a comprehensive FDI review mechanism comparable to those seen, for example, in European countries. Rather, the Investment Charter 2022 concentrates on incentivising investment in specified sectors and regions. The amendments introduced with the new charter seek to streamline administrative procedures for investors, lower barriers to establishing and operating businesses in the country, enhance the transparency and predictability of administrative processes, and attract investment by offering a range of incentives. These incentives include tax advantages, subsidies, and other supportive measures aimed at...
1. What is the applicable legislation? There is no single, stand‑alone foreign investment statute that creates an all-encompassing foreign direct investment ( FDI) framework in Nigeria. Rather, the rules that apply to FDI sit across multiple enactments. The core provisions appear in: the Nigeria Investment Promotion Commission Act 1995 ( NIPCA 1995); the Foreign Exchange ( Monitoring and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995, Chapter F34; the Companies and Allies Matters Act 2020 ( CAMA 2020); the Immigration Act 2015; the National Office for Technology Acquisition and Promotion Act 1979; and the Investment and Securities Act 2025 ( ISA 2025). In addition, subject to the state from which capital is deployed, multinational and bilateral investment treaties can be relevant. The latest adjustments to Nigeria’s FDI landscape concerned revisions to the procedures of the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission ( Investment Commission) rolled out in 2023. Those changes are aimed at...
1. What is the applicable legislation? Lebanon has no standalone law on foreign direct investment ( FDI). Rather, rules relevant to foreign investment are set out in the Investment Law 360/2001 ( Investment Law 2001), which applies equally to overseas and local investors. The Investment Law 2001 functions as an investment promotion framework offering incentives to invest in Lebanon. It does not create supervisory bodies or impose limits on foreign investment. Any such limitations arise under other statutes, notably the Law on the Lebanese Code of Commerce 304/1942 ( Code of Commerce 1942), the Law on Publications 1962, the Gun Laws of Lebanon 137/1959 (as amended), and the Law on Foreign Acquisition of Real Property 296/2001. 2. Which government or other body (or bodies) reviews foreign investments? Foreign investment in Lebanon is in general handled by the Investment Development Authority of Lebanon ( IDAL), created...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED —this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 14 November 2025; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline European Commission FSR review of the planned acquisition of Covestro ( FS.100156) by Abu Dhabi National Oil Company PJSC. The deal features vertical intersections concerning the supply of chemical products. Latest developments On 14 November 2025, the Commission authorised the deal subject to commitments. On 13 February 2024, the Commission also cleared the transaction with commitments. It considered that the merger threatened competition in the following areas: air cargo transport services between Europe and South Korea; and passenger air transport on routes linking Seoul to specific destinations in Europe, notably Barcelona, Paris, Frankfurt and Rome. To alleviate these concerns, Korean Air pledged to: divest Asiana’s worldwide cargo freighter business; and provide rival carrier T' Way with the...
The table below records every concluded European Commission in‑depth probe under the Foreign Subsidies Regulation ( EU) ( Regulation 2022/2560) (the FSR). For details on all ongoing Commission FSR enquiries, refer to: Foreign Subsidies Regulation—ongoing cases tracker. For information on appeals pending before the General Court, see: General Court FSR appeals—ongoing cases tracker. 2025 Case ( Case number) Type of assessment Industry sector Latest......
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub reflects the position as at the decision date of 4 May 2023; it is no longer updated. For more, see the timeline. Case facts Outline of the European Commission’s merger investigation into Norsk Hydro’s proposed acquisition of Alumetal S. A. ( M.10658). The transaction entails horizontal overlaps in the market for producing and supplying aluminium foundry alloys and master alloys. Latest developments On 4 May 2023, the Commission cleared the transaction without conditions. Parties Norsk Hydro ( Hydro): A Norwegian aluminium company operating across the aluminium value chain, from bauxite and alumina production to energy generation and aluminium recycling. Alumetal S. A. ( Alumetal): A Polish producer of aluminium foundry alloys and aluminium master alloys, with plants in Poland ( Kety, Gorzyce and Nowa Sol) and Hungary (...
This Practice Note acts as a practical guide for evaluating vertical agreements that sit beyond the scope of the Vertical Agreement Block Exemption Regulation 2022/720 ( VBER 2022). It includes, amongst other elements, a synopsis of the Commission’s 2022 Guidelines on vertical restraints (2022 Guidelines), which provide detailed direction for parties in this setting. The Note proceeds on the basis that readers are already conversant with VBER 2022. For comprehensive discussion of its availability, including how the 30% market share thresholds operate and the treatment of hardcore and excluded restrictions, see Introduction to the application of Article 101 TFEU to vertical agreements and The Vertical Block Exemption Regulation 2022/720. It likewise presumes knowledge of Articles 101(1) and (3) TFEU; see Article 101(1) TFEU-the prohibition on restrictive agreements and Individual exemptions under Article 101(3) TFEU. Starting position Where a vertical agreement lies outside VBER 2022’s safe...
This Practice Note offers guidance on assessing vertical arrangements that fall outside The Competition Act 1998 ( Vertical Agreements Block Exemption) Order 2022 ( VABEO). It mainly draws together and summarises the CMA guidance on vertical restraints (2022 Guidance). Readers should already be familiar with VABEO and the Chapter I prohibition in section 2 of the Competition Act 1998 ( CA 1998). For a fuller treatment of VABEO’s availability, including the 30% market share thresholds and the hardcore and excluded restrictions, see Introduction to the application of Chapter I to vertical agreements and The Competition Act 1998 ( Vertical Agreements Block Exemption) Order 2022. More generally, see Chapter I prohibition. Starting position Where vertical agreements lie beyond the VABEO safe harbour, for example where the 30% market share thresholds are surpassed or hardcore or excluded restrictions are present, there is no general...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED -this archived case hub reflects the position as at the judgment date of 2 February 2023; it is no longer maintained. See the timeline for further details. Case facts Outline Appeal brought against the General Court’s judgment of 23 September 2020, which rejected an action for annulment of the Commission’s decision concerning Spanish aid for the purchase of ships ( SA.21233). Latest developments On 2 February 2023, the Court of Justice delivered its decision, partially annulling the Commission’s decision. In particular, the Court of Justice held, amongst other things, that the General Court’s analysis rested on the mistaken assumption that only the investors-rather than the economic interest groups ( EIGs)-could be treated as beneficiaries of the advantages arising from the tax measures at issue. Consequently, the General Court misjudged the question of selectivity. The ECJ sent the case back to the General Court. The General Court then...
ARCHIVED-this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 16 February 2023; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline A national reference from Spain seeking clarification on, amongst other matters, the quantification of damages for breaches of Article 101 TFEU. Latest developments On 16 February 2023, the Court of Justice issued its judgment. It held, amongst other things, that Article 101 TFEU must be read as not preventing national rules which stipulate that, where a claim is only partly upheld, costs are borne by each party, each bearing half of the common costs. Departing from Advocate General Kokott’s opinion, the Court clarified that any information asymmetry between the parties is not factored into the assessment of whether a national court may estimate the harm caused by the...
CASE HUB NOTE-appeal lodged before the Court of Justice in Case C-738/22 ARCHIVED This archived case hub sets out the position as at the judgment of 14 September 2022 and is no longer being maintained. For further detail, see the timeline and commentary. Case facts Outline An action was brought before the General Court contesting the European Commission’s decision of 18 July 2018, which found Google had abused a dominant position by imposing anti-competitive conditions on device manufacturers and mobile network operators to reinforce the dominance of its search engine, and levied a fine of €4.34bn. Latest developments On 13 July 2022, the General Court handed down its judgment, largely rejecting the appeal but setting aside one element. It determined that Google’s revenue sharing arrangements with manufacturers did not constitute abuse because the Commission made errors in applying the as-efficient competitor test. The Court also identified a...
BGL ( Holding) Limited & Others v CMA [ Archived] CASE HUB ARCHIVED - this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 8 August 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline An appeal was brought by BGL Holding Limited, BISL Limited and Compare The Market Limited against a penalty levied on those entities for infringing the Chapter I prohibition and Article 101 TFEU by applying wide MFN clauses to home insurance suppliers trading via its platform ( Case Number 50505). The CMA imposed a fine of £17,910,062 on BGL Holding Limited, BISL Limited and Compare The Market Limited. Latest development On 8 August 2022, the CAT delivered its judgment, allowed the appeal, and set aside the CMA’s infringement decision. In particular, the CAT found that the CMA: Committed material errors when defining the relevant market; ...
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
