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? Qatar’s foreign direct investment ( FDI) framework shifted in 2019/2020, aligning with the nation’s wider economic goals. For years it was highly restrictive. Under Foreign Investment Law 13/2000, non- Qataris were required to channel all investments via a Qatari entity, partnering with local nationals who had to own at least 51% of the vehicle. Although foreigners could petition the Minister of Commerce and Industry to raise their stake to 100%, approvals were seldom issued. The new Foreign Investment Law 1/2019 ( FDI Law 2019) and its Executive Regulations, Resolution 44/2020 ( Executive Regulations 2020), eased these ownership limits. From the FDI Law’s introduction, foreign investors may hold up to 100% of a Qatari private company operating in specified sectors, such as agriculture, selected industrial activities, health care, education, tourism, certain activities in the energy sector, mining, business...
1. What is the applicable legislation? The main laws governing foreign direct investment ( FDI) in the Philippines include: Republic Act ( RA) No. 7042, as amended by RA No. 11647, known as the Foreign Investment Act 1991 ( FIA), together with the FIA’s Implementing Rules and Regulations ( IRR), which serve as the primary framework regulating foreign investment in the Philippines. The FIA seeks to regulate and advance the State’s policy on productive foreign investment in activities that meaningfully drive sustainable, inclusive, resilient, and innovative economic growth, enhanced productivity, global competitiveness, employment generation, technological development, and nationwide progress, to the extent such investment in a given activity is permitted by the Constitution and pertinent laws, and in a manner consistent with the protection of national security......
NOTE—to check whether notification thresholds in Paraguay and worldwide are reached, please refer to: Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Paraguayan merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Paraguay? Since achieving full staffing in 2016, the National Competition Commission ( CONACOM) has assessed more than 101 merger filings, with only one rejected and at least eight approvals subject to remedies. Key regulatory progress includes CONACOM’s Merger Guidelines published in March 2021, which set out detailed merger control standards—such as thresholds for mergers, acquisitions of control, and joint ventures. Even so, CONACOM still advises undertaking pre-filing consultations as good practice. In May 2025, CONACOM adopted a new resolution revising and updating the Merger Guidelines and the information required for merger...
NOTE—to check whether notification thresholds in Nigeria and across the globe are met, see further: Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Nigerian merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Nigeria? Until quite recently, merger activity in Nigeria fell under the oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Investment and Securities Act, 2007. After the Nigerian Parliament’s approval in December 2018 and Presidential assent on 30 January 2019, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, 2018 (the Act) was enacted into law. The Act established a modern competition law framework and a dedicated regulator. The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission ( FCCPC) began operations in April 2019 and is empowered to...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer updated. The UK has enacted The Competition Act 1998 ( Vertical Agreements Block Exemption) Order 2022 ( VABEO). From 1 June 2022, VABEO superseded the Vertical Restraints Block Exemption Regulation 330/2010 ( VBER 2010) in the UK. The European Commission has also brought in the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation 2022/720 ( VBER 2022), which replaced VBER 2010 in the EU on the same date. Together with their 2022 guidance/guidelines, the UK’s VABEO and the EU’s VBER 2022 materially alter how most-favoured nation ( MFN) clauses are approached. This Practice Note predates both instruments and reviews how MFNs were treated by the European Commission and national competition authorities before VABEO and VBER 2022. For analysis of MFNs in the EU under Article 101 TFEU, VBER 2022 and the Commission’s 2022 Guidelines on Vertical...
Note— To check whether notification thresholds in Kuwait and worldwide are triggered, refer to Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Kuwaiti merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Kuwait? From late 2020, Kuwait began a major overhaul of its merger control framework, which came into effect in the latter half of 2021. In November 2020, the legislator enacted Law 72/2020 on the Protection of Competition ( Competition Law 2020). Among other amendments, it replaced market share criteria with turnover- and asset value-based filing thresholds. Additional clarification on the new regime was set out in Decree 14/2021 on the Executive Regulation to the Competition Law ( Executive Regulations 2021). However, neither the Competition Law 2020 nor the Executive Regulations 2021 specified the...
Prepared in collaboration with a partner at the Jordanian law firm International Business Legal Associates, this overview explores key matters on merger control in Jordan... Note: to verify whether notification thresholds in Jordan and globally are met, please refer to Where to Notify... 1. Have there been recent developments regarding the Jordanian merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Jordan? After the government tabled reforms in July 2022 to Competition Law No. 33 of 2004 ( Original Competition Law), the package proceeded through the constitutional stages, was debated and approved by Parliament, and was subsequently ratified by His Majesty the King. The changes were enacted as Amending Law No. 12 for 2023, published in the Official Gazette on 16 April 2023 and entering into force on 16 May 2023 ( Amending Law). The...
This Practice Note serves as a model for an initial request for information ( RFI) to carry out a multi-jurisdictional merger control review and an initial antitrust risk appraisal. It is based on a standard acquisition where one company ( Company 1) buys another ( Company 2). Depending on the deal structure, the RFI should be adapted accordingly. It also assumes the relevant business manufactures goods; it must be revised before being used for services. It is recommended that a comparable RFI is sent to the other party through its own antitrust counsel. Before collecting (and sharing) information, the exchange should be governed by confidentiality and/or clean team agreements or similar arrangements. In any event, all communications should be channelled via each party’s external counsel. For an example precedent of a Clean Team Agreement, see further Clean team...
CASE HUB NOTE—appeal lodged before the General Court in Case T- 1139/23 ARCHIVED This archived case hub sets out the position as at the decision date, 25 September 2023; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and commentary. Case facts Outline The European Commission examined the planned purchase of Flugo Group Holdings by Booking Holdings ( M.10615). The operation raised concerns about horizontal overlaps in the market for accommodation online travel agencies. Latest developments On 25 September 2023, the Commission blocked the deal. It determined that the transaction would have enabled Booking Holdings to bolster its dominant position in the market for hotel online travel agencies within the EEA. The commitments proposed by Booking Holdings were deemed insufficient to remedy the Commission’s concerns. Parties Booking Holdings ( Booking): A publicly listed company incorporated in the US, operating OTA brands including Booking.com, Rentalcars, Priceline and Agoda. In the EEA,...
The table lists completed European Commission investigations into cartels and anti-competitive agreements (breaches of Article 101 TFEU) and completed sector inquiries carried out under Article 17 of Regulation 1/2003 since 2013 This table sets out concluded European Commission probes into cartels and other anti-competitive arrangements infringing Article 101 TFEU, together with sector inquiries finalised under Article 17 of Regulation 1/2003 from 2013 onwards. Only matters that have been publicly disclosed appear here. For live European Commission behavioural cases, consult EU behavioural investigations—ongoing cases tracker. For appeal information before the General Court, see General Court appeals—ongoing cases tracker and General Court Article 101 TFEU appeals—closed cases tracker; for appeals before the Court of Justice, see Court of Justice appeals—ongoing cases tracker and Court of Justice Article 101 TFEU appeals—closed cases tracker. For completed Article 102 TFEU infringement inquiries, see EU Article 102 TFEU...
The list below monitors current European Commission in‑depth investigations and ongoing State aid sector inquiries. Concluded investigations are moved to EU State aid decisions (non in‑depth investigations)—closed cases tracker. For details of State aid appeals before the General Court, see General Court State aid appeals—ongoing cases tracker; for appeals before the Court of Justice, see Court of Justice State aid appeals—ongoing cases tracker; and for national reference cases before the Court of Justice involving State aid, see Court of Justice State aid national references—ongoing cases tracker. In-depth investigations Revision of CE Oltenia’s restructuring plan (amending SA.59974) ( SA.117913) — Romania Industry: Electricity generation from non‑renewable sources Type of aid: Other Latest step: Decision to open the formal investigation...
Legal privilege is the principal way a company can refuse to disclose a confidential communication or document to a third party, such as a competition authority or the court. Whether a communication benefits from privilege depends on who is involved in the exchange and the purpose for which the document was created. The scope of legal privilege can vary, sometimes considerably, depending on the jurisdiction and the nature of the proceedings. Why is legal privilege important? Privilege matters because it can operate as an absolute bar to disclosure in the following scenarios: on-site inspections under competition law by competition and regulatory authorities (‘dawn raids’), requests for documents made by competition or regulatory authorities, and disclosure obligations in court proceedings EU legal privilege The legal position EU law does not expressly recognise legal privilege, whether in Articles 101 and 102 TFEU or in the...
Note—to check whether notification thresholds in Egypt and worldwide apply, consult Where to Notify. Egypt is also part of COMESA, which runs a supranational merger control regime. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Egyptian merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Egypt? Merger control in Egypt is chiefly regulated by Law 3/2005 on the Protection of Competition and the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices ( Competition Law 2005) and Prime Ministerial Decree 1316/2005 issuing the executive regulations to Law 3/2005 ( Executive Regulations 2005). Both instruments were recently overhauled to introduce a pre-closing notification merger control system with a standstill obligation in Egypt. The Competition Law 2005 was amended by Law No. 175 of 2022 Amending Some Provisions of the Law on the Protection of Competition and...
Note—this guide is presently being updated by local counsel, following confirmation that new merger thresholds will come into force on 1 November 2025. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in the EAC? The East African Community’s merger framework is established by the East African Community Competition Act, 2006 ( EAC Competition Act), the East African Community Competition ( Amendment) Act, 2010, and the East African Community Competition Regulations, 2010 ( EAC Regulations). Implementation and enforcement sit with the East African Community Competition Authority ( EACCA). The EAC’s member states are Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda. The EAC Competition Act applies to economic activities and sectors with a cross‑border effect, meaning activity that spans the...
Note—consult Where to Notify to check whether notification thresholds in Costa Rica and across the globe are met. 1. There have been recent developments regarding the Costa Rican merger control regime. What are the main points of interest and are any further updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Costa Rica? A ruling is keenly awaited in 2025 from the competent authority on the request for merger analysis between LBT CT Communications and Millicom Spain S. L. (case file L0159- STT- MOT- CN-01308-2024) (not reported by Lexis Nexis®). The operation has attracted considerable interest, as both companies are major players in the telecommunications industry, with reach extending to the international arena. A preliminary assessment by the Superintendence of Telecommunications ( SUTEL) indicates both undertakings hold a strong presence across multiple segments, including fixed broadband internet,...
Practice Note The unanticipated arrival of the Competition and Markets Authority ( CMA) — or another sector regulator — to execute a dawn raid is rarely welcome for any organisation and its officers or employees. This Practice Note sets out an outline of the CMA’s inspection powers, including unannounced visits, addressing: the CMA’s authority to carry out dawn raids the CMA’s ability to conduct interviews the boundaries on these powers (for example, legal privilege and protection against self-incrimination) practical pointers, including how to contest a warrant Specifically, the Note examines powers linked to civil investigations (undertaken under the Competition Act 1998 and strengthened by the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 ( DMCC Act 2024)) and to criminal investigations into the cartel offence (as provided in Part 6 of the Enterprise Act 2002 ( EA 2002)). It also notes that the CMA’s civil powers under Part 1 of the...
Note—to check whether notification thresholds in Austria and worldwide are triggered, see: Where to Notify... 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Austrian merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Austria? Looking back to an earlier, yet still highly relevant, reform, the 2017 amendments to the Cartel Act 2005 and the Competition Act 2002 introduced a transaction value threshold into Austrian merger control. Under the Cartel Act, s 9(4), a concentration must also be notified where all of the following conditions are fulfilled: the undertakings concerned together achieve more than €300m in worldwide turnover their combined Austrian turnover exceeds €15m the consideration paid (transaction value) is above €200m the target undertaking has significant activity in Austria This additional threshold, inspired by a similar German...
A central tenet of EU competition law is that rival undertakings operate on markets without coordinating their conduct. Generally, active rivalry is expected to deliver maximum consumer welfare, allocate resources most efficiently and, in the context of the EU single market, advance deeper market integration. The European Commission (the Commission), along with other regulators such as national competition authorities, is therefore cautious about arrangements that could soften competitive pressure or remove the commercial uncertainty that should exist between competitors. Nevertheless, businesses may have sound reasons to conclude agreements that include provisions or obligations with the potential to limit competition. This is particularly so where such arrangements are designed to create or encourage beneficial outcomes (efficiencies) that would not materialise in the absence of the restriction embedded in the agreements. Cooperation may sometimes be needed to realise otherwise unattainable...
The Commission holds extensive investigatory powers to enforce EU competition law and pursue antitrust infringements, including cartels. Among these, it may require undertakings and associations of undertakings to provide all necessary information... Two types of request for information ( RFI) Article 18 of Regulation 1/2003 provides for two forms of request for information ( RFIs): Simple RFIs, which are voluntary—recipients are not obliged to reply; if they choose to respond, they may leave some questions unanswered. However, they must not submit false or misleading information. A simple RFI should: state the legal basis and the purpose of the request identify the information sought, including documents containing that information set the time-limit for providing the information ...
CASE HUB (appeals lodged by Telefonica and Portgual Telecom at the General Court in Cases T- 216/13 and T- 208/13–see Cases T-208/13 Portugal Telecom v Commission and T-216/13 Telefónica v Commission (non-compete)) ARCHIVED –this case hub, archived, sets out the position as at the decision date of 23 January 2013; it is no longer maintained......
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
