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
ARCHIVED This archived Practice Note outlines the data protection regime in place before 25 May 2018 and reflects the position under the Data Protection Act 1998 ( DPA 1998). It is provided for background only and is not updated. It identifies and explains the main exemptions available under the DPA 1998. When does the DPA 1998 apply? Before invoking any exemption, you should first determine the underlying obligation it concerns and why the exemption is needed. The first step is to confirm whether the DPA 1998 applies at all and, if it does, what it requires. This depends on: the nature of the information (personal data) the operations carried out on that personal data (processing) the equipment and/or the location used for processing which party bears the duties (data...
ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is no longer maintained. It charted the progress of UK primary legislation introduced as part of the legislative preparations for the UK’s exit from the EU during the 2017–19 Parliament. Following the prorogation of the 2017–19 Parliament on 8 October 2019, the Brexit Bills moving through Parliament that had not yet secured Royal Assent fell, namely: Agriculture Bill Financial Services ( Implementation of Legislation) Bill [ HL] Fisheries Bill Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination ( EU Withdrawal) Bill Trade Bill For further reading, see: Brexit Bulletin—key Bills fall away on prorogation of Parliament, LNB News 09/10/2019 64......
ARCHIVED: This historical tracker sets out the replies to significant pensions consultations—formal and informal—issued by the UK government and other organisations prior to 2025. For details of major pensions consultations—both formal and informal—run from that point onwards by the Department for Work and Pensions ( DWP), the Pensions Regulator, the Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA), HM Treasury, HM Revenue and Customs ( HMRC) and other pensions bodies, refer to Practice Note: Consultation tracker—pensions. Consultation response Summary Further information PSIG Future Strategy Consultation Consultation period: 1 May 2024 to 31 July 2024 Response published: 20 December 2024 A formal response was published on 20 December 2024. From 1 May to 31 July 2024, the Pensions Scams Industry Group ( PSIG) undertook a sector-wide call for views across the pensions industry to shape the organisation’s next phase and direction. It targeted pensions...
ARCHIVED This case tracker has been archived and is not maintained. It presents a selection of significant pensions judgments issued in 2013–2014. Grenville Holden Hampshire v Board of the Pension Protection Fund Case Name and Reference Number Grenville Holden Hampshire v Board of the Pension Protection Fund — A3/2015/0237 Decision, Representation, Court and Judgment Date, Citation Grenville Holden Hampshire appealed a determination of the Pension Protection Fund ( PPF) Ombudsman in the High Court, contending that: the government had breached the EU Archived Insolvency Directive ( Archived Directive 80/987/ EEC, superseded by Archived Directive 2008/94/ EC on materially identical terms), which requires member states to ensure scheme members receive at least 50% of their benefits where the employer is insolvent; and the Directive has direct effect on UK legislation, requiring domestic law to be interpreted as containing that...
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note provides information on the data protection regime before 25 May 2018 and reflects the position under the Data Protection Act 1998 ( DPA 1998). This Practice Note is for background purposes only and is not kept up to date. Under the DPA 1998, data controllers handling personal data must observe the following eight principles: Principle 1: personal data must be processed fairly and lawfully Principle 2: personal data must be collected only for specified and lawful purposes Principle 3: personal data must be adequate, relevant, and not excessive Principle 4: personal data must be accurate and maintained up to date Principle 5: personal data must not be retained longer than necessary Principle 6: personal data must be processed in line with the rights of data subjects Principle 7: safeguards must exist against...
ARCHIVED : This case tracker has been archived and is not maintained. It hosts a catalogue of notable pensions judgments delivered in 2015. Alexander and others as Trustees of the Scottish Solicitors Staff Pension Fund v Pattison and Sim Case reference: CA63/13. The dispute concerned a Scottish pension scheme providing benefits to employees of solicitors’ firms and their dependants, and focused on changes to the scheme’s trust deed and rules. Until 1991, the rules imposed a ‘triple‑lock’ for amendments, demanding a two‑thirds majority at three separate general meetings: one of all employers and members, one of all contributing members, and one of all employers. The trustees pursued pension arrears of £50,224 to recover contributions alleged to be owed by the defenders in respect of a former employee of that firm, with the claim founded on amendments made to the scheme rules since 1990. The defenders (the firm of...
ARCHIVED: This tracker is archived and no longer maintained. It presents a compilation of pensions rulings issued by the General Regulatory Chamber ( GRC) of the First-tier Tribunal ( FTT) and the Upper Tribunal ( UT) in 2024, specifically concerning appeals against decisions of the Pensions Regulator regarding breaches of automatic enrolment duties, arranged by date. You can browse the entries using the Table of Contents located on the left side of the page......
ARCHIVED This case tracker has been archived and is not maintained. It sets out key pensions judgments delivered in 2019, arranged by topic. The entries within the tracker are grouped by subject area, and the relevant topics appear in the Table of Contents on the left-hand side of the page. The tracker also includes citations to case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union ( CJEU). Broadly speaking, EU judgments issued on or before 31 December 2020 remain binding on UK courts and tribunals (even where the EU courts subsequently depart from them) unless and until the UK courts exercise their powers to diverge. As a rule, EU case law developed after that date is not binding in the UK, though UK courts and tribunals may still have regard to later EU judgments where relevant. For further detail on how EU case law is...
ARCHIVED This case tracker is archived and is no longer maintained. It provides a catalogue of pensions judgments delivered by the General Regulatory Chamber ( GRC) of the First-tier Tribunal ( FTT) and the Upper Tribunal ( UT) in 2023, specifically and directly concerning appeals against decisions of the Pensions Regulator for breach of automatic enrolment duties, arranged by date. Entries can be accessed via the Table of Contents on the left-hand side of the page......
ARCHIVED : This case tracker has been archived and is not maintained. It includes a catalogue of notable pensions rulings issued in the year 2018. Items in this tracker are arranged by subject area. Those subjects are set out in the Table of Contents (to the left of the page). This tracker also cites decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union. In broad terms, EU decisions delivered on or before 31 December 2020 continue to be binding on UK courts and tribunals (even where the EU courts subsequently depart from them) until the UK courts use their powers to diverge. In general terms, EU case law created after that date is not binding on the UK, though the UK courts and tribunals may still 'have regard to' EU decisions if relevant. For further detail and background on the handling of EU case law, see...
Automatic enrolment Automatic Enrolment ( Earnings Trigger and Qualifying Earnings Band) Order 2017 Under section 13 of the Pensions Act 2008 ( Pen A 2008), an individual’s qualifying earnings are those exceeding the amount in subsection (1)(a) and not surpassing the amount in subsection (1)(b). The earnings trigger for automatic enrolment and re-enrolment is the pay level at which employers must automatically place eligible jobholders into a qualifying workplace pension scheme. For money purchase arrangements, the qualifying earnings band identifies the slice of pay on which employers and workers must make at least the minimum contributions. Each tax year, the Secretary of State must review: the automatic enrolment earnings trigger the automatic re-enrolment earnings trigger the qualifying earnings band If the Secretary of State considers that any figures should be altered, they are amended by statutory instrument. Provisions under Pen A 2008, sections 14 and 15A,...
While operating an occupational pension scheme, trustees might decide to bring in an investment consultant and/or a fiduciary manager. In contrast to ‘fund managers’, investment consultants and fiduciary managers are not regarded as ‘professional advisers’ for the purposes of pensions legislation. For more detail on the rules about appointing professional advisers, refer to Practice Note: Appointing pension professional advisers and other service providers. Development of regulatory framework After a reference from the Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA), the Competition and Markets Authority ( CMA) investigated investment consultancy services ( IC services) and fiduciary management services ( FM services) supplied to pension schemes, and issued its final report on 12 December 2018. It concluded that trustee engagement was weak, that clear and comparable information in order to assess value for money was missing, and that clients were nudged by investment consultants towards their own,...
Prior to 6 April 2015, individuals entitled to money purchase benefits (also referred to as defined contribution ( DC) benefits) faced a narrow set of retirement choices: receiving a scheme pension drawdown purchasing a lifetime annuity Buying a lifetime annuity was the route most frequently taken, chiefly because the other two options were only accessible: if the member’s scheme allowed them (which was uncommon in practice) for drawdown, if the member met certain conditions On 6 April 2015, pension freedoms were introduced to broaden the retirement pathways open to DC members and those with other ‘flexible benefits’ (e.g. cash balance benefits). Drawdown not only became far more widely available, but members with flexible benefits could also take their pension pot as one or more lump sums, called ‘uncrystallised pension fund lump sums’. For more detail, see Practice Notes: Pension...
Age discrimination—the statutory framework Rules outlawing age discrimination entered UK statute in 2006, arising from shifts in EU law—most notably the Archived Directive 2000/78/ EC ( Archived Equal Treatment Framework Directive), as it had effect immediately before IP completion day (ie 11 pm on 31 December 2020). Although the Archived Equal Treatment Framework Directive, like other EU directives, has been transposed into UK domestic legislation, the directive itself does not form part of domestic law (not even as assimilated law), and stands outside it. The UK measures enacted in 2006 to give effect to the Archived Equal Treatment Framework Directive and other EU law applied to employment generally, rather than being confined to pension schemes. The current statutory architecture is set out in the Equality Act 2010 ( Eq A 2010) and, in respect of pension schemes, the Equality Act ( Age...
Purpose of participation Admitting a new employer to an occupational pension scheme is intended to extend the scheme’s benefits to that employer’s relevant employees, ensuring those workers of the new employer can access the benefits provided. Reason for participation An employer might choose to participate in a scheme for various reasons. For example: it has recently been acquired by an employer that already participates in the scheme following a business reorganisation, employees have transferred to it from another employer that is already in the scheme it wishes to alter the pension arrangements offered to its staff (for instance, closing a defined benefit scheme to new members and joining another group defined contribution arrangement), or it must enter a pension scheme for automatic enrolment purposes Who may participate? The scheme’s governing documentation determines who can become a participating employer in any particular scheme and will set out the conditions for...
ARCHIVED This archived Practice Note summarises the reforms introduced by the Finance Act 2004 on A-day (6 April 2006) and the principal features of the post A-day pensions tax regime. It is not maintained. For details of the current pensions tax position, see Practice Note: Tax treatment of pensions—an introduction... Changes made on A-day Registration The present pensions tax regime commenced on A-day. Prior to A-day, pension schemes needed to be treated as ‘exempt approved’ by the Inland Revenue (now HMRC) to obtain favourable tax treatment. From A-day onwards, this was replaced with a requirement for both occupational and personal pension schemes to be registered with HMRC. For further details, see Practice Note: Registration of pension schemes. Schemes that held exempt approved status before A-day were registered automatically on A-day, unless the scheme administrator chose not to register. For information on the pre A-day regime, see...
From 6 April 2016, ‘qualifying schemes’ are no longer permitted to apply active member discounts ( AMDs). The provisions giving effect to this prohibition are set out in: for DC occupational pension schemes, in the Occupational Pension Schemes ( Charges and Governance) Regulations 2015, SI 2015/879, reg 11 for workplace personal pension schemes, in COBS 19.6.11–12 What is an active member discount? An AMD—also called a deferred member penalty—means charging deferred members (described in the Occupational Pension Schemes ( Charges and Governance) Regulations 2015, SI 2015/879, as ‘non-contributing members’) more than active members (termed ‘contributing members’). To whom does the AMD ban apply?......
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note centres on the abolition of contracting-out on a money purchase (or protected rights) basis, taking effect from 6 April 2012. It is not maintained and remains archived. For general information concerning the meaning of contracting-out, see the Practice Note entitled: What does ‘contracting-out’ mean for pension lawyers? Contracting-out on a money purchase basis before 6 April 2012 Contracting-out was the route by which an individual (whether employed or self-employed) could choose to waive accrual of the part of the State pension which, before 6 April 2016, was called the additional State pension (or Second State Pension ( S2P)). Contracting-out on a money purchase basis (also known as DC contracting-out) first became possible in April 1988. A money purchase form of contracting-out required the relevant contracted-out pension scheme to grant members ‘protected rights’ in lieu of the state benefits forgone as a...
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note, which applies in relation to schemes that were contracted-out salary-related ( COSR) immediately before 6 April 2016, explains the extent of the statutory power enabling employers of former COSR schemes, up to 5 April 2021, to revise scheme rules so as to counter any rise in national insurance contributions arising from the ending of defined benefit ( DB) contracting-out on 6 April 2016. It also explores how that power operates for multi-employer arrangements, ‘protected persons’ and public sector schemes, together with the way it interfaces with existing consultation and disclosure duties and processes. This Practice Note is no longer maintained. For further information on the abolition of DB contracting-out, see Practice Note: Abolition of DB contracting-out—an introduction [ Archived]......
STOP PRESS : On 18 March 2026, the Pension Protection Fund ( PPF) released its levy policy statement and the definitive rules for 2026/27, together with scheme guidance explaining how to comply with the levy framework and how the PPF intends to exercise discretion where the rules allow. These documents implement the PPF’s earlier message: no PPF levy will be charged to conventional schemes in 2026/27, while the proportionate, risk-based Alternative Covenant Schemes ( ACS) levy will be retained. Although the current ACS framework is broadly unchanged, the PPF has pledged to fast-track a review of the ACS levy methodology so it remains proportionate from 2027/28 onwards. In the interim, a small suite of targeted refinements is being introduced, as consulted on, alongside a minor addition to the ACS Guidance reflecting consultation feedback. The PPF also draws attention to the closure of its...
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
