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 Practice Note distils cases pertinent to claims against directors. It illustrates the wide spectrum of actions and questions that may surface in director-focused proceedings, with an emphasis on decisions from February 2026 onwards. For digests of rulings before 2026, see Practice Note: Claims against directors—key and illustrative decisions [ Archived]. For guidance on the principal heads of claim relevant to director disputes, and the practical points worth addressing at the outset of any claim against a director, see Practice Note: Claims against directors—key considerations for dispute resolution practitioners. Case details and analysis Court of Appeal: South Bank Hotel Management Company Limited v Galliard Hotels [2026] EWCA Civ 56 — News Analysis: Conversion under section 21(1)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980 and good faith pursuant to section 44(5) of the Companies Act 2006 ( South Bank v Galliard) — Judgment date: 6 February...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and not maintained. It provides guidance on employing remote and hybrid hearings, both by video-conference and by telephone, in civil proceedings during the coronavirus ( COVID-19) pandemic. It reviews the court’s approach to remote or hybrid hearings over the pandemic and the guidance issued by the courts for handling remote hearings, including measures adopted to deal with them. For details of current guidance concerning remote and hybrid hearings in civil proceedings, see Practice Note: Remote and hybrid hearings in civil proceedings. Courts approach to remote hearings during the coronavirus ( COVID-19) pandemic The position on remote hearings shifted substantially from the outset of the pandemic, but the following cases illustrate how the courts dealt with applications for remote hearings during that period. As a rule, in all cases, whether a hearing should proceed remotely, and the mode by which each...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived, not updated, and supplied purely for background reference. It is not maintained and remains available solely as background material. In addition, certain links may no longer lead to the provisions as they stood when the guidance in this Practice Note was issued. For details on earlier or later changes to the CPR, see: CPR updates—overview and Procedure Rule Committee minutes—overview. Agreed minutes The CPR Committee has provided the agreed minutes of this meeting here, for ease of reference only: Costs budgeting After the new Precedent H was released in April 2016, several queries emerged. District Judge Lethem carried out detailed analysis of them and decided they were merely technical, not matters of substance. Therefore, no changes to Precedent H are before the CPR Committee. Accordingly, nothing substantive was identified. Note: minor amendments are anticipated; see Practice Note: Further revisions to...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived; it is not updated, serving background information only...
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note is not maintained and is for background information purposes only Some links may no longer lead to the provisions as they stood when the guidance in this Practice Note was issued. For details of earlier and/or later changes to the CPR, see: CPR updates—overview and Procedure Rule Committee minutes—overview. Replies to the questions posed were provided by: Mr Justice Coulson—the Deputy Head of Civil Justice Mr Justice Birss— Senior Court Judge Mr Justice Kerr— Senior Court Judge District Judge Hovington— Northern Circuit District Judge Lethem— South Eastern Circuit Mr John Dagnall— Barrister at Maitland Chambers A copy of the Questions and Answers later approved by the CPR Committee ( CPRC) is also available here: CPR Committee agenda Question How do the secretariat and the chair settle the CPRC’s agenda and the subjects on which it...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived, no longer maintained, and for background information use only...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note is retained purely for historical reference. The principal legislation addressing reforms to funding arrangements is contained in Part 2 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 ( LASPO 2012), with consequential amendments reflected in the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 ( CLSA 1990). Changes The changes relating to funding arrangements are set out in: conditional fee agreements ( CFAs): LASPO 2012, s 44 concerns success fees in CFAs, defines the requirements for a valid CFA including a success fee, and confirms that success fees are no longer recoverable from the losing party......
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note stems from provisions revoked on 1 April 2013 and is kept solely for historical reference. It sets out the requirements for costs estimates that must be lodged with the court and served on the other parties (and on the client) under practice direction 44, para 6. It should be considered in conjunction with the following Practice Notes: Own client costs information [ Archived], addressing the costs information that must be given to the client under the 2011 Solicitors Code of Conduct Costs management in Mercantile and TCC courts—pilot scheme. There is currently a costs management pilot operating in the Mercantile and TCC courts, under which parties are required to provide a costs budget at the first CMC What is an estimate of costs? ......
Appeals—court guides Parties bringing an appeal must observe the rules applicable to that appeal. The framework for appeals to the County Court, the High Court and the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal is set out in CPR 52 together with the accompanying Practice Directions— CPR PD 52A, CPR PD 52B, CPR PD 52C and CPR PD 52D (general civil litigation provisions). The provisions addressed in this Practice Note should be read alongside those general civil litigation provisions. Guidance on these provisions is available here: Civil appeals: general and preliminary considerations—overview Civil appeals to the County Court and the High Court—overview Civil appeals to the Court of Appeal—overview In addition to all relevant CPR provisions, practitioners must also adhere to any requirements in a specialist court guide for the division or court where the case is being heard. This Practice Note offers...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained This Practice Note outlines choice of court agreements under Article 23 of Regulation ( EC) 44/2001, Brussels I. It examines the conditions for an effective agreement and when the article does not apply. It also covers the hearing, the standard of proof, and whether jurisdiction is exclusive or non-exclusive. The effect on non- EU parties is considered. Since 10 January 2015, Regulation ( EC) 44/2001, Brussels I was repealed and replaced by Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). Transitional arrangements mean Brussels I may still govern your matter; see Practice Note: E& W Brussels I (recast)—application and exclusions. For types of jurisdiction clauses, see Practice Note: Jurisdiction agreements—introduction. What is a choice of court agreement? Article 23 of Regulation ( EC) 44/2001, Brussels I permits parties to choose the court or courts that will have...
ARCHIVED This archived Practice Note condenses a range of key and/or illustrative authorities on injunctive relief, with emphasis on the period from September 2019 to 31 December 2024. It is not maintained and is supplied for background only. For guidance and links to materials on the principles the courts apply when deciding whether to award an interim or final injunction, see: Interim and final injunctions—overview. For summaries of illustrative rulings from 1 January 2025 onwards, see Practice Note: Injunctions—illustrative decisions (2025)... Case details and analysis King’s Bench Division Shell UK Ltd v Persons Unknown [2024] EWHC 3130 ( KB) Judgment date 5 December 2024 Case summary This ruling illustrates the High Court granting ‘final’ injunctive relief against persons unknown (including newcomers) as well as named defendants in a protest context. Shell had earlier obtained interim orders in 2022, which were successfully renewed in 2023 and 2024 across three sets of...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is not maintained. It offers general context and a summary of the amendments to CPR 6, CPR 74 and Practice Direction 74A introduced to align with the revised jurisdiction provisions in Brussels I (recast), which took effect on 10 January 2015. Full details of the CPR changes commencing on 10 January 2015 are contained in Practice Note: CPR changes— January 2015 ( Brussels I (recast)) [ Archived]. This Practice Note was updated in January 2015 and will not be updated again. The links in Related Documents lead to maintained materials and set out the current position. Note: Lexis+® UK Dispute Resolution refers to Brussels I and Brussels I (recast). The CPR provisions, however, refer to the previous Judgments Regulation and the Judgments Regulation...
E& W Brussels I (recast)—the exception to the lis pendens rule (art 31(2)) [ Archived] ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note examines the carve-out from the lis pendens mechanism contained in Article 31(2) of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). It operates only where the parties have concluded an exclusive jurisdiction clause, also termed an exclusive choice of court agreement; it does not extend to non-exclusive jurisdiction arrangements. When Article 31(2) is engaged, the court designated by the exclusive clause may proceed to decide whether it has jurisdiction even if it is not the first court seised of the claim. Impact of UK’s departure from the EU Following exit day (ie 31 January 2020), the UK became a third state in respect of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). Owing to transitional measures in the...
This Practice Note provides a concise overview of bankruptcy and its effect on legal proceedings from a dispute resolution standpoint, summarising key points in practice... What is bankruptcy? Bankruptcy is an insolvency route for individuals. It applies to individuals only. Prior to 6 April 2016—and in contrast to corporate liquidation—only the court had power to make an individual bankrupt. From 6 April 2016, a new bankruptcy applications regime took effect, replacing debtors' bankruptcy petitions, though creditors' petitions remained unaffected. Petitions lodged by debtors before that date were unaffected; now, anyone seeking their own bankruptcy must file an online application decided by an adjudicator—an official of the Insolvency Service—rather than the court. For more detail and background, see News Analysis: New bankruptcy applications regime to come into force. Once a bankruptcy order is made—by the court or by the...
This Practice Note summarises the background to the respective positions of the UK and EU. It is presented for academic interest only and is archived... Background Civil judicial co-operation— UK and EU approaches After the EU referendum, work on civil judicial co-operation concentrated on securing targeted transitional arrangements, aiming to maintain legal certainty across key areas of law and practice as the UK departed the EU. The EU and the UK chiefly articulated their positions in a series of documents and later released a joint progress report. Provisions on civil justice are included in the political declaration... EU — 12 July 2017 EU — 12 July 2017 UK — 22 August 2017 UK — 23 August 2017 UK and EU — 8 December 2017 UK/ EU — 17 October 2019: Political declaration setting out the framework for the future...
This Practice Note on avoiding civil litigation sets out what to weigh up and what to do as a contractual dispute develops, so as to reduce the likelihood of the matter progressing to court proceedings (litigation) in England and Wales. For related guidance, see Practice Note: Resolving a dispute—initial considerations. Why avoid litigation?(the ‘litigation cost’) Litigators do not always acknowledge it, but for many clients, once a contract dispute is litigated (ie ‘we go to court’), there is, to some extent, already a failure. The reason is that the overall ‘litigation cost’ can be immense, including: financial outlay—covering the client’s fees with you (and any experts needed to support their case) and, potentially, the other side’s costs too (see Practice Note: Costs orders—the general rule) lost management time—with senior personnel and other staff diverted from productive business work while meeting the demands of the process (the...
Archived This Practice Note is archived and retained solely for historical reference purposes. Lord Rupert Jackson and Lord Neuberger are delivering a series of lectures titled the Civil Litigation Costs Review Implementation Programme......
ARCHIVED This Practice Note is archived, not updated, and offered purely for background information only...
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note is not updated and exists for background information purposes only...
ARCHIVED This Practice Note is archived, not maintained, and provided solely for background information purposes...
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
