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
E& W Brussels I—recognition of judgments [ Archived] ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer maintained. It offers guidance on seeking recognition of a judgment in the courts of England and Wales for enforcement under Regulation ( EC) 44/2001, Brussels I. A judgment is only capable of recognition and enforcement under that regime where proceedings were commenced between 1 March 2002 and 9 January 2015. If this guidance does not apply, see: Which regime applies to enforce a foreign judgment?—checklist. The Note examines Articles 32–37 of Regulation ( EC) 44/2001 concerning the recognition of judgments, settlements, or authentic instruments. It summarises the general rules, then considers whether a formal application for recognition is required. It addresses applications for recognition both in England and Wales and in an EU Member State. It also explores, in some detail, the possible bases for refusing...
This Practice Note makes reference to: the Insolvency Act 1986 as IA 1986 the Law of Property Act 1925 as LPA 1925 the Senior Courts Act 1981 as SCA 1981 the County Courts Act 1984 as CCA 1984 the Enterprise Act 2002 as En A 2002 the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 as POCA 2002 Scope Receivership is notably intricate because numerous variants exist. This overview distils the principal forms of receivership and considers their effect on litigation from a dispute resolution standpoint. It outlines the key categories of receivership and their implications for legal actions, reflecting the dispute resolution angle and reinforcing how appointments can significantly affect ongoing or contemplated proceedings. What is receivership? Appointing a receiver is a remedy enabling creditors and specified third parties to safeguard their interest in a company’s assets. Several categories arise depending on...
Quistclose trusts operate as a proprietary remedy. This Practice Note examines when a court will recognise a Quistclose trust over money or property misappropriated by, or found in the hands of, the defendant. For general guidance on proprietary remedies, see Practice Note: Proprietary remedies—what, when and why. What is a Quistclose trust? The term ‘ Quistclose’ comes from Barclays Bank Ltd v Quistclose Investments Ltd. A Quistclose trust may arise where money or other property is transferred to another for a specified purpose. The critical element is that the transfer is for that purpose; if that particular objective fails to materialise, the property is treated as held on a resulting ( Quistclose) trust. In Quistclose itself, the respondent advanced funds to a company to finance a dividend, and a separate bank account was opened to receive the loan. The company then went into...
This Practice Note considers the level of security the court may order when determining an application for security for costs. This note outlines how the court approaches fixing the quantum of security, including whether it should reflect costs assessed on the standard basis or on an indemnity basis. It explains the considerations used to set the figure and the circumstances in which the court may adjust it. Assessment of available assets and the respondent’s ability to meet any costs order Whether the sum requested is disproportionate or excessive The impact of approved costs budgets The effect of any conditional fee agreement Potential enforcement difficulties It also addresses whether the court may direct specified or part payments, and whether it will later revise the level of security ordered. On 6 April 2025, amendments to CPR 25 came into force, which...
This Practice Note is archived and is not being maintained... Recovery of CFA success fees and ATE insurance premiums in publication and privacy proceedings Following the commencement of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 ( LASPO 2012), for conditional fee agreements ( CFAs) entered into after April 2013, a CFA claimant must satisfy any success fee from the damages recovered. At the same time, the recoverability of after-the-event ( ATE) insurance premiums was abolished. These changes are subject to transitional arrangements... Transitional provisions preserve the recoverability of success fees and premiums (additional liabilities) where CFAs and ATE policies were taken out prior to the relevant LASPO 2012 provisions coming into force on 1 April 2013. Funding put in place before 1 April 2013 remains governed by the rules that applied when the arrangements were made, even if the success fee or premium is...
ARCHIVED: This record is kept solely for historical reference and preservation. The pilot scheme concluded on 31 March 2013. For details on provisional assessment, refer to Practice Note: Provisional assessment. This archived notice is retained for historical purposes only. Jackson reforms As part of the Jackson reforms, Lord Justice Jackson, in his 13 January 2012 report on the pilot, found it to be a success and advised that it should be implemented across the country, with training provided to staff and district judges to help them carry it out successfully. Draft rules were prepared, to be presented to the Rule Committee in due course. For more information on the report, see News Analysis: Lord Justice Jackson report on provisional assessment pilot. What is this? The County Court Provisional Assessment Scheme (the Scheme) was a pilot under which parties were entitled to request a written, detailed...
This Practice Note sets out the principal ways by which parties can safeguard confidential material from exposure while pursuing or defending a civil claim, or by initiating a separate claim. Defining confidential information Information is confidential to the individual who controls it (and potentially to others identified expressly or by implication), and includes personal data as well as: data concerning another person, even where lawfully obtained with that person’s consent data held by a family member, such as a parent controlling a child’s data data managed by a legally appointed representative, for example a trustee holding a beneficiary’s data trade secrets material supplied or sent in confidence to a third party, including legal advisers, sometimes shared subject to a contractual bar on further disclosure passwords associated with password‑protected email accounts Whether information is confidential depends on analysing the content and the context in which it arose, not on the label attached to it....
This Practice Note on proprietary remedies explains what they are, when you may pursue them and why. What are proprietary remedies? A proprietary remedy (sometimes termed a proprietary claim) attaches to specific property, rather than a personal remedy such as a claim for damages. That does not exclude the possibility that the property is money or a debt; it can be either ( Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale). For these purposes, ‘property’ includes, eg: Real property and other tangible assets Money Intangible assets (such as shares) Digital assets and/or the proceeds of sale of such ‘property’ Where the defendant has received property which, at law or in equity, can be traced to the claimant, a proprietary claim may follow. A claimant seeking a proprietary remedy must establish not only that the defendant received property belonging to the claimant, but also that the defendant still has that property (or that it can be...
ARCHIVED : This archived Practice Note sets out a summary of a number of important and/or illustrative decisions concerning proprietary freezing injunctions (also referred to as proprietary injunctions and/or proprietary asset preservation injunctions) decided before April 2025. It is no longer maintained and is provided solely for background purposes. For examples from April 2025 onwards, refer to Practice Note: Proprietary freezing injunctions—illustrative decisions (2025). For full guidance on the applicable principles in proprietary freezing injunction cases, see Practice Note: Proprietary freezing injunctions. Case details and analysis Chancery Division (on appeal from the County Court sitting in Cardiff) Khan v Goldfarb [2025] EWHC 874 ( Ch) 30 January 2025 Case summary The appeal against the continuation of a without notice proprietary injunction over several properties held by the appellant and her mother was dismissed. The injunction had been secured by the father’s trustee in...
This Practice Note This Practice Note provides a synopsis of illustrative decisions on applications for proprietary freezing injunctions from April 2025 onwards. It aims to convey the breadth of factual patterns and questions that can emerge in relation to these orders. For significant and illustrative rulings predating April 2025, see Practice Note: Proprietary freezing injunctions—key and illustrative decisions (pre- April 2025) [ Archived]. For detailed guidance on the governing principles in proprietary freezing injunction matters, consult Practice Note: Proprietary freezing injunctions. Be aware that the CPR provisions concerning interim injunctive relief—covering both proprietary and freezing orders—were amended with effect from 6 April 2025. In particular, CPR 25 underwent substantial revision and the associated Practice Directions, together with the specimen draft orders contained in Annex A and Annex B to Practice Direction 25A, were revoked. From 6 April 2025, new model orders took effect,...
This Practice Note sets out illustrations of decisions where proportionate costs orders have been considered, listed with the most recent ruling first. The cases below are provided as guidance only, as each matter is fact-specific and the judge retains a wide discretion on costs... Judgment Issue Comment Kallakis v AIB Group [2020] EWHC 3867 ( Comm) — Percentage of proportionate costs order: The court observed that the application had materially narrowed the claims and considered this should be reflected in the costs order. Taking that together with the time spent on witness evidence, the judge decided it was appropriate to award the claimant a proportion of its costs, namely 65% of the costs of the summary judgment application. Holyhead Marina Ltd v Farrer [2020] EWHC 1750 ( Admlty) at para [88] —...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and available purely for historical reference only. To help readers trace how the application of proportionality evolved, we have placed the judgment date immediately following the judgment citation for ease of reference. The new CPR provisions Two further provisions were introduced into the CPR to address the issue of proportionality more directly. They were (emphasis supplied) as follows: CPR 1.1—overriding objective: 1) These Rules constitute a new procedural code whose overriding objective is to enable the court to handle cases fairly and at proportionate expense......
This Practice Note considers the different legal bases for bringing a professional negligence claim This Practice Note examines the alternative legal foundations for pursuing a professional negligence claim, namely establishing that the professional owed the claimant a duty. At certain times, whether such a duty arises is intertwined with the nature of the loss claimed, which in turn defines the scope of the duty and related matters; for authoritative direction on these points, see: Professional negligence claim—scope of duty, causation and remoteness—checklist and related content. For guidance on starting a professional negligence claim, consult the following Practice Notes set out below: Starting a professional negligence claim—a practical guide Pleading professional negligence claims—worked hypothetical examples and related precedents For the required standard of care in professional negligence matters, refer to these key Practice Notes: Standard of care in professional negligence claims Standard of...
This Practice Note reviews the current Pre- Action Protocol for Professional Negligence claims, now in force. Note: proceedings commenced on or after 1 October 2015 in the Business and Property Courts may fall within, or be appropriate for, either the shorter trials scheme or the flexible trials scheme. See Practice Notes as set out below: Business and Property Courts—shorter trials scheme Business and Property Courts—flexible trials scheme Scope of this Practice Note This Practice Note explores certain issues a claimant may encounter when seeking to pursue professional negligence claims so as to comply with the Pre- Action Protocol for Professional Negligence claims (the ‘ Protocol’). See also: Professional negligence claims—claimant steps—checklist. For guidance for defendants, see the following resources: Practice Note: Professional negligence claims—pre-action protocol—defendant issues Professional negligence claims—defendant...
As outlined in The economic torts—overview, the law provides protection for a person’s trade or business against conduct regarded as unacceptable in a commercial context. For guidance on claims concerning: the tort of intentional violation of the claimant’s rights in a judgment debt—see Practice Note: The Marex tort (interference with a judgment debt) unlawful interference—see Practice Note: Economic tort of unlawful interference conspiracy, whether by lawful or unlawful means—see Practice Note: Civil conspiracy claims (economic tort) matters founded on unconscionable and intimidating conduct—see Practice Note: Economic duress—undue influence—tort of intimidation This Practice Note addresses the economic tort of procuring a breach of contract (also termed inducing a breach of contract, and sometimes described as ‘interference with contractual relations’). Civil claims involving allegations of fraud and dishonesty frequently proceed by pleading one or more of the economic torts; see Practice Note: Civil...
This Practice Note outlines the common law doctrine of privity of contract; the equitable and statutory exceptions to it; how the doctrine bears on enforcing a contract against a non-party; and what occurs where, despite no privity, a contract has an indirect impact on a third party. For guidance on contracts and third parties more broadly, and on the Contracts ( Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 ( C( RTP) A 1999), see the following Practice Notes: Contracts and third party rights Third party rights—the Contracts ( Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 What does privity of contract mean? ‘ Privity of contract’ is a common law doctrine that provides a person cannot: enforce the benefit of a contract to which they are not a party, or be liable for any obligation under such a...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer maintained. It is retained for historic reference only, as it concerns CPR 81 in the form that applied before 1 October 2020, and Practice Direction 81, which was revoked in full with effect from 1 October 2020. If handling a committal application after 1 October 2020, you should refer to the CPR 81 currently in force and the relevant Practice Notes—see: Contempt and committal—overview. For the pre‑1 October 2020 version of CPR 81 or Practice Direction 81, see: This Practice Note provides, in a table, where to seek permission to issue committal proceedings arising from alleged interference with the administration of justice, or from a false statement contained in a document verified by a statement of truth. For guidance, see also: Practice Note: When permission is required to bring committal proceedings [ Archived] Practice Note:...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note provided guidance on the requirements for a bill of costs for detailed assessment prior to 1 October 2017 under both old Part 47 and old practice direction 47 as well as old practice direction 51L which set out a voluntary pilot scheme. For information on the up to date position in relation to bill of costs, see Practice Note: Detailed assessment—bill of costs. 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017—detailed assessment under practice direction 51L This voluntary pilot operated from 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 and was contained in old practice direction 51L. It was available only for detailed assessment proceedings in the Senior Courts Costs Office. The scheme specified the information to be included within the bill of costs, while the standard detailed assessment framework in Part 47 and practice direction 47 continued to apply so far as there was no...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained . This archived Practice Note reviews the principal actual and potential legal and practical ramifications of the UK’s exit from the EU ( Brexit) for arbitration law and practice in England and Wales, using England and English as shorthand. It also addresses how the EU‑ UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement ( TCA) relates to arbitration conducted in England. In brief, and explored further below, the legal and practical effects of Brexit on arbitration in England are, or are anticipated to be, limited, with little, if any, negative impact on practitioners or on London’s standing as a leading seat of international arbitration globally. That said, the short-, medium- and long-term consequences for the arbitration market in London and across England cannot be wholly disentangled from the broader outcomes of the UK’s...
This Practice Note illustrates the court’s approach to applications seeking orders that a hearing should proceed in private and/or that publication by way of reporting be restricted. It is intended to be read together with Practice Note: Private hearings and restricted reporting in civil proceedings. Case details and analysis Issues considered Getty Images ( US) Inc v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 ( Ch) This liability ruling in the Intellectual Property dispute between Getty Images and Stability AI records that, at the parties’ request, an earlier confidentiality order created a comprehensive regime to protect confidential material disclosed during the proceedings, with the consequence that parts of the trial evidence relied upon by the parties were marked Confidential or Highly Confidential, and that brief private sittings were required during cross-examination in order to maintain that...
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
