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
If a national court or tribunal in an EU Member State considers the meaning of a point of EU law unclear for a live dispute, it may—and in certain instances must—seek a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice or the General Court. This Practice Note sets out the characteristics of the preliminary ruling mechanism together with: the scope and aims of the mechanism the situations in which a court or tribunal may, or is obliged to, submit a preliminary reference the proper moment to lodge the request for a preliminary ruling what is meant by ‘national court’ and ‘national tribunal’ for these purposes the method for making a request for a preliminary ruling, and the phases of a preliminary reference Background reading and statistics on preliminary references can be found in the annual reports of the Court of...
This Practice Note examines, in particular, the courts’ approach when related proceedings are initiated in different jurisdictions within the EU. Related proceedings are also actions so closely and intrinsically connected that it is appropriate to hear and determine them together, thereby avoiding the risk of inconsistent judgments which might otherwise result if they were pursued separately. This Practice Note sets out the meaning of ‘related proceedings’ as defined in Article 30 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), and reviews the range of considerations a court may apply when deciding whether to stay proceedings as appropriate. In addition to related proceedings, another species of multiple actions is ‘parallel proceedings’ or ‘lis pendens’, addressed in Article 29 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). For guidance on the following topics, see: parallel proceedings: Practice Notes— Brussels I (recast) — parallel...
This Practice Note reviews the EU’s Authority for Anti- Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism ( AMLA) and explains the following: AMLA’s remit the legal framework for AMLA— Regulation ( EU) 2024/1620 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2024 establishing the Authority for Anti- Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism and amending Regulations ( EU) 1093/2010, ( EU) 1094/2010 and ( EU) 1095/2010 (the AML Agency Regulation ( AMLAR)) principal implementation dates AMLA’s governance and decision-making the EU’s Central AML/ CTF Database AMLA’s financing and annual financial levy For guidance on the financial services firms within scope of AMLA’s direct oversight (termed Selected Obliged Entities), see Practice Note: AMLA: direct supervision of qualifying financial services firms. That Note addresses the criteria and selection method AMLA will apply to...
This Practice Note explains how contract claims are dealt with under Article 7(1) of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). This Practice Note clarifies the treatment of contractual claims under Article 7(1) of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). It examines the necessary connecting factors, the nature of the contractual obligations, and identifies the relevant place of performance and the place of delivery. It also differentiates between contracts for the sale of goods and those involving the provision of services. The rules governing such claims appear in Article 7 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), which replaced Article 5 of Regulation ( EC) 44/2001, Brussels I. Although the recast introduced certain changes, the Court of Justice’s case law interpreting Article 5 of Regulation ( EC) 44/2001 should continue to inform both the construction and application of Article 7 of the recast...
Carbon pricing: background Carbon pricing remains the principal tool in endeavours to tackle climate change. At the international level, the Kyoto Protocol and its flexibility mechanisms gave parties with Kyoto commitments market-based avenues to cap or cut greenhouse gas ( GHG) emissions, alongside domestic actions. These mechanisms comprise: Clean Development Mechanisms ( CDM) (art 12) Joint Implementation ( JI) (art 6) International Emissions Trading (art 17) These correspond to arts 12, 6 and 17, respectively. The Kyoto framework, in turn, prompted the EU’s Emission Trading System ( ETS), created through Directive 2003/87/ EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003, which set up a Community-wide scheme for trading GHG emission allowances and amended Council Directive 96/61/ EC (the EU ETS Directive). Since then, an extensive and diverse suite of carbon pricing...
Articles 26 and 28 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) This Practice Note reviews the provisions in Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) on when a defendant is taken to have submitted to the court’s jurisdiction. Central to this is the requirement that the defendant enters an ‘appearance’, and the Note examines what amounts to an appearance and the associated practical considerations. If no appearance is entered, submission may not arise and the court may stay the proceedings. The Note also addresses the practical issues around whether the defendant has been given adequate information to enable an appearance under Article 28 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). In addition, it considers cases with a UK connection following the UK’s exit from the EU. As a general rule, the Regulation no longer applies to new UK...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is not being maintained. It examines how Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), applies to disputes that involve non- EU Member States (commonly called third states). It outlines the provisions in that regulation which may govern third-state situations, all of which relate to jurisdiction, and considers the consequences for the UK when applying those provisions after its exit from the EU. Definitions This Practice Note uses the following definitions: European Communities Act 1972 — ECA 1972 European Union ( Withdrawal) Act 2018 — EU( W) A 2018 European Union ( Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020 — EU( WA) A 2020 exit day — as set out in EU( W) A 2018, s 20, means 31 January 2020 at 11 pm Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements concluded on 30 June 2005 at The Hague — the...
This Practice Note reviews Article 8 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), and the departures from the default position that a claimant should issue proceedings where the defendant is domiciled. It addresses third parties, counter-claims and rights in rem. It does not include the Article 8(1) provisions on multiple defendants, which are examined in Practice Note: Brussels I (recast)—multiple defendants (art 8). Third parties—art 8(2) Under Article 8(2) of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, a person domiciled in a Member State may likewise be sued as a third party—whether on a warranty, a guarantee, or in other third‑party proceedings—before the court seised of the principal claim, save where that claim was brought solely to deprive the court otherwise competent of jurisdiction. This mirrors Article 6(2) of Regulation ( EC) 44/2001, Brussels I. Article 8(2) applies where a defendant seeks to join a third party for...
This Practice Note examines the necessity of a harmful event in order to confer special jurisdiction on a court under Article 7(2) of Regulation 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). It also explores what amounts to a harmful event for specific types of claims, including economic loss, damaged or defective goods, personal injury claims, intellectual property claims, actions for inducing breach of contract, as well as other categories of claim. For guidance: on the general principles that apply when dealing with tort and delict claims under the regulation, see Practice Note: Brussels I (recast)—tort and delict claims (art 7(2)) when dealing with contract claims under the regulation, see Practice Note: Brussels I (recast)—contract claims ( Art 7(1)) Authorities When construing and applying the wording in Article 7(2) of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), authorities decided under the same or equivalent provisions in either...
This Practice Note examines the point at which a court becomes seised of proceedings under Article 32 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). Identifying the court that is first seised is essential to the functioning of Articles 29–31 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), which address the prevention and management of concurrent proceedings. Text of article 32 Article 32 of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) restates the earlier provision found in Article 30 of Regulation ( EC) 44/2001, Brussels I, while also giving further clarification. The opening of Article 32 in the recast mirrors the wording of its predecessor provision and maintains the same starting point for determining when a court is seised: ‘1......
This Practice Note examines Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), and how it operates in relation to recently acceded EU Member States and to non- EU Member States (third states). It additionally addresses the scope of the regulation—namely civil and commercial matters—and explains the implications of that scope, together with the particular subjects excluded from the regulation’s ambit. It further considers the international requirement. The Note therefore clarifies coverage, boundaries, and the cross-border element in detail. Its focus remains strictly on matters governed by the Regulation alone. New EU Member States Where a state joins the European Union, actions can be initiated post-accession even if the underlying legal relationship pre-dates accession. In Pula Parking v Tederahn (2017), the Court of Justice confirmed that Brussels I (recast) governs in those circumstances. There, a parking penalty was imposed in Croatia before its 2013 EU...
The legal technology landscape is changing at pace, spawning a fresh vocabulary of AI-related terms and expressions. For those who are not product developers or software engineers, it is useful to clarify what these phrases mean. This Practice Note is intended to help legal professionals gain a clearer grasp of key Artificial Intelligence ( AI) concepts. For further detail on the technology underpinning AI, see Practice Note: Artificial intelligence and machine learning—an introduction to the technology. The Basics Algorithm: a coded series of instructions within software that resolves a problem or executes a computation. Artificial Intelligence ( AI): computer software and systems capable of exhibiting human intelligence. They can learn, plan, reason, or handle natural language as they operate, rather than relying only on pre-programmed tasks; for example, speech recognition, computer vision, translation between natural languages, and other mappings of inputs. In the UK and EU,...
This Practice Note examines how the breadth of the EU right of residence derived from EU citizenship, first acknowledged by the Court of Justice in Ruiz Zambrano, has since been curtailed by later rulings and its operation limited to defined situations. The recognition of EU citizenship rights in Zambrano In Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v Office national de l'emploi, the Court of Justice marked a watershed in the developing body of EU citizenship law, conferring on EU nationals—and, crucially, their relatives—an autonomous, directly enforceable entitlement to reside, separate from the freedoms laid down in EU free movement rules, notably Directive 2004/38/ EC, the Citizens’ Directive. Briefly, two married Colombian citizens sought asylum in Belgium. Although their claim failed, removal was not possible. While in Belgium, the couple had two children. The children neither obtained Colombian nationality nor were they registered as Colombian. To avoid...
Article 101(1) TFEU bans agreements that may influence trade between Member States and whose object or effect is to prevent, limit, or distort competition within the common market. Nevertheless, a restrictive arrangement—whether between competitors or non-competitors—will not fall foul of Article 101(1) TFEU if its impact on competition is not appreciable. Put simply, the prohibition does not bite where any identified anti-competitive effects, whether presumed or otherwise, are insignificant; the harm must be sufficiently substantial to justify the attention of the authorities... De minimis doctrine—appreciability This principle, referred to as the de minimis doctrine, was first articulated in Völk v Vervaecke, where the Court of Justice held that an agreement lies outside Article [81(1)] if it has only a trivial influence on the market, bearing in mind the weak market position of the parties in the relevant product market. This applies whatever the nature of the...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer updated. The UK is no longer subject to the Rome Convention as a matter of international law, following departure from the EU. Even so, its substantive provisions still apply in certain instances, namely where a contract was concluded between 1 April 1991 and 16 December 2009 and meets the requirements in the Act. As a result, those rules remain in the C( AL) A 1990, but with changes made by The Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations and Non– Contractual Obligations ( Amendment etc) ( EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/834. For current guidance, see Practice Note: Contracts ( Applicable Law) Act 1990—application and interpretation. This Practice Note outlines when the Rome Convention governs and when it does not. It also explains the exclusion of renvoi, considers public policy implications, and addresses the position where a state has more...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and no longer updated. It is not maintained. On 10 May 2022, the Commission introduced the new Vertical Block Exemption Regulation 2022/720 ( VBER 2022). This measure was formally adopted by the Commission. With effect from 1 June 2022, VBER 2022 superseded the former Vertical Restraints Block Regulation 330/2010 ( VBER 2010, also called the VRBE in this Practice Note). This Practice Note was prepared with VBER 2010 in mind. Note—the VBER 2010 lapsed on 31 May 2022 and, from 1 June 2022, was succeeded by the VBER 2022. Under Article 10 of VBER 2022, a 12‑month transition period (ending on 31 May 2023) applied to pre-existing vertical agreements in force on 31 May 2022 that met the exemption criteria under VBER 2010 on 31 May 2022 but did not meet the exemption criteria under VBER 2022....
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained Stop press: On 30 April 2024, Regulation ( EU) 2024/1183, the European Digital Identity Framework ( EUDI Regulation), was published in the Official Journal of the EU (see: LNB News 30/04/2024 39). The Regulation took effect on 20 May 2024 and amended Regulation ( EU) No 910/2014, the EU e IDAS Regulation. This Practice Note has therefore been archived—for further details on the EU e IDAS Regulation as amended by the EUDI Regulation (also called the Revised EU e IDAS Regulation or EU e IDAS 2.0), see Practice Note: The revised EU e IDAS Regulation ( EU e IDAS 2.0). This archived Note summarises Regulation ( EU) 910/2014 (the e IDAS Regulation), which establishes the legal framework for electronic signatures within the EU. It sets out who may use electronic signatures and the contexts in which they are...
ARCHIVED : The UK’s withdrawal from the EU means UK courts can no longer refer questions to the Court of Justice. Previously, such references were made under the former CPR Part 68 and its associated practice direction; both were revoked at IP completion day (31 December 2020 at 11 pm). The old Part 68 and Practice Direction 68 remain available to view For guidance, see: Practice Note: Brexit post implementation period— CPR changes [ Archived], especially the main section: Part 68— References to the European Court News Analysis: Brexit next steps: The Court of Justice of the European Union and the UK Definitions and rules This Practice Note refers to the following: Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice—referred to as the Rules of Procedure Court of Justice practice directions to the parties concerning cases brought before the...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained This case tracker outlines notable judgments and opinions from the EU General Court and the Court of Justice issued from 1 January 2024, of potential interest to energy lawyers. The tracker is split into: the General Court of the European Union the Court of Justice of the European Union For more on EU energy legislation introduced in 2024, see Practice Note: EU energy tracker 2024. For 2025 developments, consult: EU energy tracker 2025 EU energy cases tracker 2025 General Court of the European Union Nord Stream 2 v Commission ( Case T-526/19) — Judgment: 27 November 2024 Energy — Internal market in natural gas — Directive ( EU) 2019/692 — Amendments to Directive 2009/73/ EC — Legal certainty — Equal treatment — Proportionality — Misuse of powers — Procedural...
ARCHIVED This Practice Note is archived and no longer updated. It collates closed legislative proposals, published judgments and completed consultations from 2022–24 that are absent from the current Copyright and databases tracker— EU because they do not relate to this year. To monitor live legislative proposals, relevant judgments, consultations, guidance and reports on EU copyright and databases, see Practice Note: Copyright and databases tracker— EU. For earlier archived material before 2022, see Practice Note: Copyright, media and digital tracker 2017–2021 [ Archived]. Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports For current legislation, consultations, guidance and reports, see Practice Note: Copyright and databases tracker— EU— Legislation, consultations, guidance and reports. For archived developments before 2022, see Practice Note: Copyright, media and digital tracker 2017–2021 [ Archived]. What's happening? When? Find out more The EU’s harmonised rules on artificial intelligence, Regulation ( EU) 2024/1689 (the EU AI Act) 1 August 2024: EU AI Act...
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
