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
Sections 7 and 8 of the Data Protection Act 1998 ( DPA 1998) grant a data subject the right to obtain personal data held by a data controller. A request for such information is termed a data subject access request, commonly abbreviated to ‘ SAR’ or ‘ DSAR’. This Practice Note reviews SARs and the considerations when dealing with them, covering procedural and administrative steps, statutory timeframes for replies, and best practice drawn from the Information Commissioner’s subject access code of practice. A data subject is a person to whom personal data relate—of any age or nationality under the DPA 1998—but they must be alive to qualify. For clarification of core terms used in this Practice Note, including personal data, data subject and data controller, see Practice Note: Key definitions under the DPA 1998. Changes as a result of the General Data...
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note outlines the data protection framework in force prior to 25 May 2018 and describes the position under the Data Protection Act 1998 ( DPA 1998). It is supplied for background purposes only and is no longer updated. Sections 7 and 8 of the DPA 1998 define a data subject’s right to obtain access to personal data held by a data controller. A request for such information is called a subject access request, often abbreviated to ‘ SAR’ or ‘ DSAR’. When responding to any SAR, the first step is to verify that the requester has satisfied the relevant procedural requirements. For further detail, see Practice Note: Subject access requests under the DPA 1998. This Practice Note considers the narrow exemptions within the DPA 1998 that allow a data controller to refuse disclosure of personal data to a data subject who has made a...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is not maintained How does Brexit impact standard terms and conditions? Brexit’s key effects on standard terms and conditions arise from practical adjustments to be addressed when drafting and assessing the suitability of standard form terms for the purchase and supply of goods and/or services, covering both business to business and business-to-consumer contracts. Review of suitability Standard form terms and conditions should be checked to ensure they remain appropriate for use after IP completion day, both for the commercial arrangements they govern and the contract wording itself. Consider whether any standard terms and conditions require amendment or tailoring. This may include clauses on territorial scope, pricing, tax, intellectual property, data protection, applicable law, jurisdiction and dispute resolution. See Practice Notes: Brexit—contract risk management [ Archived] Brexit—drafting commercial clauses [ Archived] ...
This Practice Note on strategic lawsuits against public participation ( SLAPPs) explains what they are, outlines proposed procedural responses, and sketches their evolution... SLAPPs—what are they? The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 ( ECCTA 2023) now contains a statutory definition of a SLAPP claim ( ECCTA 2023, s 195); however, that definition is confined to matters linked to economic crime... Preceding this ECCTA 2023 definition, the government issued a policy paper in June 2023 (updated 1 March 2024), Factsheet: strategic lawsuits against public participation ( SLAPPs). It described SLAPPs as legal proceedings commonly brought by corporations or individuals to harass, intimidate, and wear down opponents financially or psychologically through misuse of the legal system. They are often presented as defamation claims by wealthy individuals (including Russian oligarchs) or companies to avoid public‑interest scrutiny. SLAPPs arise across a wide range of areas,...
STOP PRESS: On 19 June 2025 the Data ( Use and Access) Bill secured Royal Assent, was enacted as the Data ( Use and Access) Act 2025 ( DUAA 2025), and took partial effect immediately. Provisions dealing with, among other things, handling data subject access requests and granting powers to make further regulations commenced on 19 June 2025. Measures relating to Information Commissioner notices and elements of law enforcement processing started on 19 August 2025, two months after Royal Assent. Most of the Act still awaits commencement via additional statutory instruments. Parts 5 and 6 update elements of UK data protection and e Privacy law, touching the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation, Assimilated Regulation ( EU) 2016/679 ( UK GDPR), the Data Protection Act 2018, and the Privacy and Electronic Communications ( EC Directive) Regulations 2003, SI 2003/2426. Most Part 5 measures are...
While the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 ( IPA 2016) largely superseded the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ( RIPA 2000), the Part III provisions of RIPA 2000—dealing with the ability of public bodies to issue notices requiring the decryption of encrypted information or the provision of decryption keys—remain in effect, albeit as modified by the IPA 2016. For further details on the IPA 2016, see Practice Note: The regulation of intelligence gathering—an introductory guide... Investigation of encrypted electronic data RIPA 2000, Pt III governs investigations by a public authority into electronic data protected by encryption. The statutory scheme is supplemented by a Code of Practice, which is admissible in evidence in both criminal and civil proceedings. A wide range of methods enable businesses, individuals and criminals to secure and protect their electronic data and to maintain the privacy of their electronic...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. As of 27 June 2018, the provisions in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ( RIPA 2000) dealing with unlawful interception of communications data were repealed and superseded by Parts 1 and 2 of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 ( IPA 2016). This change abolished the offences of unlawful interception in RIPA 2000, s 1, replacing them with offences of unlawful interception and unauthorised disclosures under IPA 2016, ss 3 and 59. For guidance on the framework governing interception of communications under the IPA 2016, see Practice Note: Interception of communications under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. For an overview of the background and scope of the IPA 2016, see Practice Note: The regulation of intelligence gathering—an introductory guide. If an interception offence occurred prior to 27 June 2018,...
Retained EU Law ( Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 The Retained EU Law ( Revocation and Reform) Act 2023 ( REUL( RR) A 2023) overhauls the framework set by the European Union ( Withdrawal) Act 2018 ( EU( W) A 2018). It has a marked effect on the status and treatment of what had been retained EU law ( REUL); from 1 January 2024, by virtue of the Act, this is recognised as assimilated law. The legislation also confers a broad set of powers enabling the further amendment, repeal, and substitution of assimilated law over time. REUL( RR) A 2023 came into force in part on 29 June 2023, with additional provisions taking effect on 29 August 2023, and the remaining elements commencing on appointment. It was brought into force on 1 January 2024, save for section 6 ( Role of courts). For...
This Practice Note considers how to respond to a letter of claim of misuse of private information (a privacy claim). It covers: Early checks on receipt of a claim letter: whether a tenable claim exists, any available defences, and CPR compliance Any jurisdictional questions that could necessitate input from foreign lawyers Immediate actions: readiness for any interim injunction, steps to avert further alleged harm, and gathering and preserving documents Points to weigh before issuing a response The content and form of the letter of response Making a prompt offer to settle Settlement and alternative dispute resolution ( ADR) in general Initial case management considerations For guidance when advising your client on bringing a privacy claim, see Practice Note: Starting a claim for misuse of private information—a practical guide. For general guidance on replying to a letter of claim, see...
Brexit: On 31 January 2020, the UK ended its EU membership and entered an implementation period, during which EU law continues to apply. Throughout this phase, the GDPR remains in force in the UK, and for EEA and UK data protection purposes the UK is, in general, treated as an EU (and EEA) state. Accordingly, references in this Practice Note to EU or EEA states should be read as including the UK until that period ends. For more guidance on that period, its length and the data protection laws expected to apply afterwards, see Practice Note: Brexit—implications for data protection [ Archived]. ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived material and reflects the position before the General Data Protection Regulation became applicable. It is provided for background only and is not maintained. The General Data Protection Regulation ( EU) 2016/679 (the GDPR) was...
Brexit: On 31 January 2020, the UK left its status as an EU Member State and moved into an implementation period, during which EU law still applies. Throughout this phase, the GDPR remains in force in the UK and, for EEA and UK data protection purposes, the UK is broadly regarded as if it were an EU (and EEA) country. Accordingly, any mention of EEA or EU states in this Practice Note should be interpreted as also covering the UK until that period ends. For more detail on that window, its length and the data protection laws expected to apply once it concludes, see Practice Note: Brexit—implications for data protection [ Archived]. ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived content and sets out the position prior to the General Data Protection Regulation becoming applicable. This Practice Note is for background information only and is not...
In brief A public authority is not obliged to respond to a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ( FIA 2000) if any of the following apply: the anticipated cost would surpass the appropriate limit the request is vexatious the request is repeated an exemption applies The FIA 2000 includes a range of exemptions allowing an authority to withhold the information sought. These broadly fall into two groups: absolute exemptions qualified exemptions, which are subject to a public interest test When managing a request—even where an exemption is engaged—an authority must still meet its duty to offer advice and assistance, so far as it is reasonable. Therefore, even if material is considered exempt, the authority should do more than send a refusal notice and should also think about what additional help can be given to the...
STOP PRESS: With effect from 24 February 2025, the principal provisions of the Procurement Act 2023 ( PA 2023) are now operative. Procurement exercises launched on or after that date must, without exception, proceed under PA 2023, whereas those initiated under the previous regime—including the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016, Concession Contracts Regulations 2016, and the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011—must continue to be procured, administered and managed in accordance with that legislation. The Cabinet Office has likewise refreshed and republished its collections of standard contract documents, templates and guidance materials for the government’s Model Services Contract, Mid‑ Tier Contract and Short Form Contract. These revised materials were issued in tandem with the PA 2023 ‘go‑live’ on 24 February 2025. This Practice Note will be updated shortly to reflect and incorporate these developments. In the meantime, see News...
Since the arrival of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ( FIA 2000) and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 ( EIR 2004), SI 2004/3391, commentators have argued that releasing information risks curbing candid and open policy debate within public authorities. Claims of a chilling effect on discussion, and the necessity of a safe space for debate, are usually presented within the public interest considerations advanced by authorities seeking to apply a qualified exemption to an information request. Key illustrations are FIA 2000, s 35 (formulations of government policy, etc), FIA 2000, s 36 (prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs) and EIR 2004, reg 12(4)(d) and (e) (exceptions to the duty to disclose environmental information). Both safe space and chilling effect arguments concentrate on the need to shield internal deliberation and the decision-making process. What is meant by a ‘chilling effect’ and by ‘safe...
Boilerplate provisions in public sector contracts This Practice Note examines key clauses on payment of subcontractors within public sector contracts. For further guidance on what contracting authorities (and other interested parties) should understand when deploying boilerplate terms in public sector agreements, consult Practice Note: Boilerplate provisions in public sector agreements: general considerations. Public procurement reform Procurement Act 2023 ( Commencement No 3 and Transitional and Saving Provisions) ( Amendment) Regulations 2024 ( SI 2024/959). The Procurement Bill secured Royal Assent on 26 October 2023, becoming the Procurement Act 2023 ( PA 2023). See: Procurement Bill [ HL]— LNB News 12/05/2022 14, and Procurement Bill receives Royal Assent— LNB News 26/10/2023 81. From 24 February 2025, the principal provisions of the PA 2023 are now operative. Accordingly, procurements started on or after that date must proceed in accordance with PA 2023. The pre-existing public procurement regime...
What is the UK GDPR? The Assimilated Regulation ( EU) 2016/679, known as the UK GDPR, governs the handling of personal data, aiming both to safeguard individuals and to enable the unhindered flow of such information. Insolvency professionals handle personal data in their roles as partners, employees or consultants within their organisations, and also when acting as appointed office-holders. In each of these roles, they must comply with the UK GDPR. Accordingly, the regulation applies to them in both professional and office-holder capacities alike. This note offers a concise outline of the UK GDPR’s obligations, together with practical points for those working in insolvency. The professionals concerned include insolvency practitioners, legal advisers and other professional advisers (e.g. financial advisers). After IP completion day (at 1 pm ( GMT) on 31 December 2020), the General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation ( EU) 2016/679 (the EU GDPR), was...
Norwich Pharmacal applications against online service providers This Practice Note examines particular issues that can emerge when pursuing Norwich Pharmacal applications against online service providers. For guidance on the general principles governing Norwich Pharmacal Orders ( NPOs), see Practice Note: Norwich Pharmacal orders ( NPOs). Online anonymity is often used to facilitate unlawful conduct, including infringing intellectual property rights or posting defamatory statements. Nevertheless, each click or swipe typically leaves a digital trail, even where someone intends to conceal their identity. Connecting that digital footprint to an alleged wrongdoer frequently necessitates disclosure of identifying information held by online service providers. For example: defamatory material posted on a website—operators commonly require users to register details (eg name, address, email) before allowing them to publish content, and the site may record the internet protocol ( IP) address from which the user first registered and/or posted...
This Practice Note seeks to clarify what is meant by ‘jurisdiction’ in the context of cross-border disputes arising in litigation before the courts and related procedural matters. It sets out why identifying the proper forum matters and how the courts of England and Wales (the English courts) assess whether they have authority to hear a given claim or determine a specific dispute. Several jurisdictional regimes may govern, and pinpointing the correct one can be challenging in practice from the outset. Even after selecting the relevant regime, working through its scope and operation is not always straightforward, both procedurally and substantively, in application and practice. This Practice Note assists by identifying the principal regimes and addresses related matters, including jurisdiction agreements, a defendant’s domicile, staying proceedings in favour of a competent court, or seeking a declaration that a court lacks...
For information on the overarching regime overseeing the use of powers under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 ( IPA 2016), see Practice Note: Scrutiny of intelligence gathering and the role of commissioners under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. What does the investigate? The IPT has jurisdiction to examine and resolve complaints relating to the conduct and deployment of covert surveillance by public authorities, including UK intelligence agencies. Section 65(5) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ( RIPA 2000), as amended by IPA 2016, provides a detailed catalogue of what amounts to ‘conduct’ for the IPT’s purposes. In essence, ‘conduct’ covers a public authority exercising covert surveillance powers under IPA 2016 or RIPA 2000, and any activity undertaken by or on behalf of the intelligence services. By way of illustration, the IPT considers complaints about conduct by or for the police, the Security Service, the Secret...
This Practice Note explores the operation of the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements when jurisdictional questions arise in practice. It reviews the varieties of jurisdiction clauses and assesses whether they fall within the Convention’s scope. It then explains the duties placed on the court named in an exclusive jurisdiction clause (the chosen court), together with the responsibilities of courts seised where they are not the designated forum (non‑chosen courts). The Practice Note also addresses the availability of anti‑suit injunctions under the Convention and how the Convention is applied in disputes involving multiple parties and interests. It should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements—application by contracting states and Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements (jurisdiction and enforcement)— Brexit considerations. An explanatory report on the Hague Convention on Choice of Court...
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
