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
This table sets out every concluded probe by the Netherlands’ competition regulator ( Autoriteit Consument en Markt— ACM) concerning suspected cartels, restrictive agreements, and misuse of dominance ( Articles 101/102 TFEU and comparable national rules) from 2016 onwards. Note—only publicly disclosed investigations appear in this table for this summary......
NOTE—this guide is currently being refreshed by local counsel following the adoption of a new Competition Law on 25 March 2026. NOTE—to check whether notification thresholds in Montenegro and worldwide are reached, please refer to: Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Montenegrin merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Also, are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Montenegro? In February 2025, the Agency for Protection of Competition ( Agency) outlined proposed amendments to the Competition Act that could bring several significant revisions. Chief among them is granting the Agency authority to levy fines for competition law infringements directly, i.e., without involvement of misdemeanour courts as at present. Further prospective amendments include: election of council members by the National Assembly; the president of the council issuing decisions in a...
1. What is the applicable legislation? Foreign direct investment ( FDI) is governed by the 2013 Law on Investment, as amended. 2. Which government or other body (or bodies) reviews foreign investments?......
Note—to check whether notification thresholds in Moldova and worldwide are reached, see: Where to Notify... 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Moldovan merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Moldova? Competition Law No 183 of 11 July 2012 (the Competition Law) came into force on 14 September 2012, so its implementation remains comparatively new. The Competition Council, entrusted with regulatory authority under the Competition Law, has subsequently issued a number of subordinate rules that supplement and complete the existing framework. The Regulation on Economic Concentrations, approved by Competition Council Decision No. 17 of 30 August 2013 (the Regulation), took effect on 11 October 2013. The Regulation partially transposes the EU Merger Regulation ( EUMR), the EU Implementing Regulation, the European Commission’s ( Commission) Notice on...
A conversation with Diana Lupu, associate, at GRATA International on key issues on FDI control in Moldova 1. What is the applicable legislation? The principal statute regulating control of foreign direct investment ( FDI) is Law No. 174/2021 on the mechanism for examining investments of significance for state security. It sets the conditions under which investors may undertake investment activities in areas considered important to state security, and defines the means of state oversight to bolster the transparency of such investments. 2. Which government or other body (or bodies) reviews foreign investments? The Council for the Promotion of National Importance Investment Projects (the Council), created by Government Decision No. 585/2016, is the body that assesses investment projects of national security...
Save for the exceptionally uncommon situation of a genuine merger of two or more businesses, a concentration under the EU Merger Regulation ( EUMR) arises when control is obtained. Control exists where rights, contractual arrangements, or other elements bestow the ability to exert decisive influence over an undertaking. In the majority of transactions, it is the rights linked to a company’s shares, and hence the ownership of those rights, that are the key and often determinative consideration in assessing whether one firm has secured control of another for the purposes of the EUMR (see A 'concentration' with an EU dimension). The EUMR’s concept of control covers not only affirmative powers to set a company’s strategy but also negative control through vetoes over pivotal matters such as the strategic plan or budget. Minority shareholdings frequently grant such veto...
CASE HUB Appeal lodged before the CAT in Case No.1590/4/12/23 ARCHIVED —this archived case hub reflects the position of the decision of 26 April 2023; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline of the UK merger inquiry into Microsoft Corporation’s proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard, Inc., highlighting horizontal overlap in the supply of gaming consoles. Latest developments On 26 April 2023, the CMA published its final report, concluding the deal could be expected to lead to an SLC in the supply of cloud gaming services in the UK, owing to vertical effects arising from input foreclosure. The CMA determined that prohibition was a proportionate measure to safeguard competition and consumers in the UK cloud gaming market, and therefore blocked the...
1. What is the applicable legislation? The main statute overseeing foreign direct investment ( FDI) in Mexico is the Foreign Investment Law ( FIL), published in the Federal Official Gazette ( Diario Oficial de la Federación) on 27 December 1993 and most recently amended on 15 June 2018, together with its Regulations. The Regulations to the FIL and the National Foreign Investment Registry were published in the Federal Official Gazette on 9 September 1998. Additionally, international FDI treaties—ie where a foreign investor’s participation confers a majority or control of the entity, management rights, or other comparable entitlements (covering any corporate right, not only economic rights to receive a defined return)—known as Agreements for the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investments ( Acuerdos de Promoción y Protección Recíproca de las Inversiones, or ‘ APPRIs’) are intended to promote and protect capital cashflow directed into...
CASE HUB NOTE—appeals filed before the Court of Justice in Cases C-496/23 and C-497/23 ARCHIVED —this archived hub records the state of play as at the judgment of 24 May 2023; it is no longer updated. For more, see timeline and commentary. Case facts Outline Appeals before the General Court aimed at setting aside an information demand made by the European Commission, arising from concerns about suspected anticompetitive behaviour by the Facebook group in its data practices and in running its social networking platform, as described in both Cases AT.40628 and AT.40684......
This month, the Australian Government opened a consultation on proposed new merger control thresholds, and the CMA published for consultation draft updates to six UK merger guidance documents... Australia— Government launches consultation on proposed new merger control thresholds In our April 2024 monthly merger update, we noted the Government’s proposed reforms to Australia’s merger control regime and indicated that notification thresholds would be consulted on further. On 30 August 2024, the Australian Government released a consultation paper. The proposal introduces separate monetary and market concentration thresholds, each with two limbs. Meeting any one of these four tests would make an acquisition notifiable. The target business or asset must also have a material connection to Australia, for example by: Being registered or located in Australia Supplying Australian customers Generating revenue in Australia Monetary thresholds The monetary test would be met where specified turnover...
This month brought routine updates to merger control thresholds in Argentina, Belarus, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Israel, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Peru, Uzbekistan and the United States; revised thresholds taking effect in Taiwan; a consultation in South Africa proposing higher thresholds and increased filing fees; and the UK government opening a consultation on proposed changes to the UK merger control regime. Argentina—annual revision to notification thresholds Argentina has implemented higher notification thresholds following the annual uplift in the value of adjustable units (the index used for the thresholds). A filing is now required where combined Argentinian turnover exceeds ARS 145bn (approx. €102.7m/ US$118.4m), up from ARS 110.2bn, unless: the value of assets transferred in Argentina does not exceed ARS 29bn (approx. €20.5m/ US$23.6m) the price for the Argentinian element of the deal does not exceed ARS 29bn (approx. €20.5m/ US$23.6m) the acquiring group has not...
This month, the Dutch Government broadened its abuse of dominance regime, allowing the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets to scrutinise mergers that do not meet notification thresholds; the Mexican Government created the National Antitrust Commission as part of major competition law reforms; and the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority issued further updates to its merger control guidance under its ‘4Ps’ modernisation programme... Netherlands— Government extends abuse of dominance rules to non-notifiable mergers From 1 September 2025, the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets ( ACM) obtained additional powers under the revised Competition Act ( CA) to assess mergers and acquisitions for potential abuse of dominance... Until now, Article 24(2) CA carved M& A deals out of the prohibition on abuse of dominance; that carve-out has been deleted... This amendment follows the Court of Justice’s ruling in Towercast, which affirmed that national competition...
Malawi— Competition and Fair Trading Act 2024 comes into force This month, reforms to competition law, including merger control, have taken effect in Malawi, while Saudi Arabia has brought amendments to its merger control guidelines into operation. Effective 1 July 2024, the Competition and Fair Trading Act 2024 (the Act) commenced, repealing the Competition and Fair Trading Act 1998. Key points on merger control are summarised below. Mandatory and suspensory merger notification The Act represents a major departure from the prior framework by instituting compulsory merger notification. At present, no monetary thresholds apply to determine which mergers must be notified. The Act envisages that thresholds could be introduced in due course. In the interim, where notifiability is unclear, parties can seek negative clearance from the Competition and Fair Trade Commission ( CFTC). The Act sets out illustrative categories of notifiable mergers, including deals likely to lead to ‘the...
Note—to check whether notification thresholds in New Zealand and worldwide are triggered, see Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the regime and are any updates expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in New Zealand? Recent New Zealand Commerce Commission ( NZCC) insights In recent years there has been a rise in clearance applications filed with the NZCC, alongside a clear increase in matters moving through to the Statement of Issues stage. The NZCC publishes a Statement of Issues for mergers that are not straightforward and which, in its view, pose material competition risks. Although seeking NZCC clearance is voluntary, a recent transaction saw the Overseas Investment Office make its consent conditional on either obtaining clearance or confirmation that none was required, which in effect made clearance...
NOTE–to check whether notification thresholds in Mongolia and throughout the world are met, see further: Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the merger control regime in Mongolia and are any updates or developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Mongolia? ......
ASEAN merger control At present, nine of the ten Association of Southeast Asian Nations ( ASEAN) Member States— Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam—have embedded merger control within their respective competition legislation. Malaysia is the outlier. The Malaysian Competition Act 2010 ( Competition Act 2010) presently contains no merger control provisions. The Malaysia Competition Commission has nevertheless indicated an intention to establish a merger control regime and issued a public consultation in 2022. As at 25 August 2025, these measures have not been put into effect, although it is anticipated that a regime will be introduced in the near future. The 2010 ASEAN Regional Guidelines on Competition Policy ( Regional Guidelines) explain that, where a staggered rollout is envisaged, merger rules should be the final element, reflecting the complexity of analysing merger matters. In short, the...
This month brings the yearly update to Colombia’s merger control thresholds, with notable threshold changes taking effect in Türkiye, and the Swedish Government submitting legislative proposals for major reforms to merger control nationwide. Colombia—annual revision to notification thresholds The yearly uplift to the tax value unit (the metric underpinning the monetary filing thresholds) has now taken effect across the regime. A deal must be notified in Colombia when: the parties’ combined turnover or assets in Colombia is at least COP 85.7bn (circa €18.7m/ US$21.2m) (equal to 7,074,307.43 Tax Value Units, up from COP 81.7bn in 2025); and the parties undertake the same economic activity or belong to the same value chain in Colombia If these criteria are satisfied, a filing is compulsory. Completion should be paused until clearance is granted (unless the combined market share is below 20%, in which case, once...
Merger decisions database spreadsheet The spreadsheet for the merger decisions database below outlines information on published merger rulings by the European Commission, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority ( CMA, formerly the Office of Fair Trading ( OFT), and the Competition Commission), the Republic of Ireland’s Competition and Consumer Protection Commission ( CCPC), the ACM in the Netherlands, the Konkurrence- og Forbrugerstyrelsen in Denmark, the Kilpailuvirasto in Finland, the Hellenic Competition Commission in Greece, the Malta Competition and Consumer Affair Authority in Malta, and the Konkurences Padome in Latvia......
CASE HUB ARCHIVED –this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 27 March 2013; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and related cases. Case facts Outline of an OFT probe under Article 101 TFEU/ Chapter I into restrictive arrangements among Mercedes dealerships, with Mercedes- Benz in certain instances acting as the facilitator (case number CE/9161—09). The OFT delivered its infringement decision and levied fines totalling £2.8m on 27/03/2013. Latest developments On 27 March 2013, the OFT announced its infringement decision and imposed aggregate penalties of £2.8m on Mercedes- Benz, Ciceley Commercials, Enza Motors, Road Range and H& L Garages Ltd......
This month marked the commencement of Peru’s new mandatory pre‑merger notification regime, and a call for lower notification thresholds in Finland... Peru—new mandatory pre-merger notification regime enters into force Peru’s mandatory pre‑merger notification system is now in force. Where the thresholds below are reached, a filing in Peru is required and completion must be stayed until approval is granted: the parties together must have an aggregate turnover in Peru of at least PEN 519.2m (around €110.8m/ US$135.7m); and at least two parties must each have turnover in Peru of at least PEN 79.2m (around €16.9m/ US$20.7m). Note – these thresholds are tied to multiples of the Peruvian Tax Reference Unit ( UIT), which is updated annually; the amounts above reflect the UIT’s current value. The current multi‑purpose market regulator, INDECOPI, will oversee the new merger control framework. Where the thresholds apply, deals must be...
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
