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
Stop Press : Finance Act 2026 ( FA 2026) makes two changes to the non-resident capital gains tax rules. FA 2026, s 40 clarifies that, for TCGA 1992, Sch 1AA purposes-namely whether an asset derives at least 75% of its value from UK land and whether the disposer has a substantial indirect interest in UK land-every cell within a protected cell company ( PCC) is to be treated as a standalone company. This applies to disposals occurring on and after 26 November 2025. FA 2026, s 41 provides that where (i) a company or individual disposes of an asset deriving at least 75% of its value from UK land, (ii) the disposal has an ‘appropriate connection’ to a collective investment vehicle ( CIV) (as defined in TCGA 1992, Sch 5AAA, para 6), and (iii) the gain is exempt under a double taxation treaty, the company or...
Tax Brexit News Analysis Lexis Nexis® Tax has issued News Analysis on a range of matters concerning the implications of Brexit, summarised below. 11/04/2023 - The Windsor Framework Tax analysis: The agreement between the UK and EU to revise the Northern Ireland Protocol, ‘ The Windsor Framework’, signals substantial shifts to trade with Northern Ireland and carries consequences for VAT and excise provisions. Announced by the UK government on 27 February 2023, it seeks to resolve perceived deficiencies arising from the Protocol. This article explores updates to the new UK internal trade scheme, the roll-out of green and red lanes, and the VAT and excise position for goods. Produced in partnership with Mark Rowbotham MA FCILT of Portcullis ISC. 23/03/2022 - Court of Appeal rules pre- Brexit references to the Court of Justice remain binding on UK courts ( HMRC v Perfect) Tax analysis: In Perfect, the Court of...
FORTHCOMING CHANGES to EIS and VCT financial limits and call for evidence on tax support for entrepreneurs: At Budget 2025, the government announced that the upfront income tax relief for individuals investing in a VCT will drop from 30% to 20%, while the EIS upfront income tax relief remains at 30%. It also outlined three measures covering both EIS and VCT: Raising the annual investment limits companies can secure under EIS and VCT from £5m to £10m, and from £10m to £20m for knowledge‑intensive companies ( KICs). Increasing the lifetime company risk finance investment cap from £12m to £24m, and from £20m to £40m for KICs. Lifting the gross assets threshold an investee must not exceed to £30m before shares are issued (from £15m), and to £35m thereafter (from £16m). These changes will be legislated in Finance Bill 2026 and take effect from 6 April...
FORTHCOMING CHANGES to EIS and VCT financial limits and call for evidence on tax support for entrepreneurs: At Budget 2025, the government confirmed that the up-front income tax relief available to an individual for funds placed in a VCT will drop from 30% to 20%. The up-front income tax relief for EIS stays at 30%. Remains unchanged for EIS. It also set out three measures applying to both the EIS and VCT schemes as follows: raising the annual amounts per year companies may secure under EIS and VCT from £5m to £10m, and from £10m to £20m for knowledge-intensive companies ( KICs) increasing the lifetime company risk finance investment cap from £12m to £24m, and from £20m to £40m for KICs, and lifting the gross assets ceiling, in aggregate, that an investee company must not exceed from £15m to £30m before shares are...
FORTHCOMING CHANGES to EIS and VCT financial limits and call for evidence on tax support for entrepreneurs: At Budget 2025, the government confirmed a cut to the upfront income tax relief for an individual’s VCT investment from 30% to 20%. The EIS upfront income tax relief remains at 30%. It also set out three updates affecting both the EIS and VCT regimes: Raising the annual fundraising ceilings companies may secure under EIS and VCT from £5m to £10m, and for knowledge‑intensive companies ( KICs) from £10m to £20m. Increasing the lifetime company risk finance cap from £12m to £24m, and for KICs from £20m to £40m. Uplifting the gross assets thresholds an investee must not exceed from £15m to £30m before shares are issued, and from £16m to £35m thereafter. These reforms will be legislated in Finance Bill 2026 and will take effect from 6 April 2026. Also at...
Like the enterprise investment scheme ( EIS), the venture capital trust ( VCT) regime exists to stimulate investment in smaller, higher‑risk trading businesses. A VCT is a company (not a trust), authorised by HMRC, with shares admitted to trading in a manner that satisfies the listing condition outlined in Practice Note: VCTs— VCT conditions for HMRC approval— The listing condition. Individuals may access a range of tax reliefs, while spreading risk, by subscribing for (or, for certain reliefs, buying) VCT shares. The VCT then invests by subscribing for new shares or debt issued by unquoted companies (for these purposes, companies quoted on AIM are treated as unquoted). For fuller information on the tax reliefs available to individual VCT investors, and on the corporation tax reliefs applicable to VCTs themselves, see Practice Note: VCTs—introduction, tax reliefs and returns. The VCT regime is...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties reform: At Budget 2025, the government released a summary of responses to the Spring Statement 2025 consultation on behavioural penalties reform, and confirmed plans to advance proposals to amend penalties for inaccuracies in tax returns and for failures to notify chargeability. That consultation was preceded by two calls for evidence: An initial call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework: Supporting a 21st Century tax system’ issued on 23 March 2021, with a summary of responses published on 30 November 2021, and A second call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework Review–enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, safeguards’, on 15 February 2024, followed by a summary of responses on 30 October 2024—this later call outlined potential options for penalty reform, including revisions to penalty suspension and escalation for continued or repeated...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties reform: At Budget 2025, the government released a summary of responses to the consultation opened at Spring Statement 2025 on behavioural penalties reform, and confirmed its intention to move forward with proposals to revise penalties for inaccuracies in tax returns and for failures to notify chargeability. This consultation built on two earlier calls for evidence: An initial call for evidence, ‘ The Tax Administration Framework: Supporting a 21st Century tax system’, issued on 23 March 2021, with a summary of responses published on 30 November 2021; and A second call for evidence, ‘ The Tax Administration Framework Review–enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, safeguards’, issued on 15 February 2024, followed by a summary of responses on 30 October 2024. This second exercise explored potential options for penalty reform, including reforms to penalty...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties reform At Budget 2025, the government released a summary of responses to the consultation launched at Spring Statement 2025 on reforming behavioural penalties, and confirmed its intention to proceed with proposals to revise penalties for inaccuracies in tax returns and for failures to notify chargeability. This consultation was preceded by two calls for evidence: an initial call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework: Supporting a 21st Century tax system’ on 23 March 2021, with a summary of responses on 30 November 2021; and a second call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework Review–enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, safeguards’, on 15 February 2024, followed by a summary of responses on 30 October 2024—this second call set out potential options for penalty reform, including changes to penalty...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties reform: At Budget 2025, the government published a detailed summary of responses to the consultation first unveiled at the Spring Statement 2025 concerning behavioural penalty reform, and confirmed its intention to move ahead with concrete proposals to amend penalties for errors in tax returns and for failures to notify chargeability. That consultation directly followed two earlier calls for evidence: an initial call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework: Supporting a 21st Century tax system’ on 23 March 2021, with a published summary of responses on 30 November 2021; and a second call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework Review – enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, safeguards’, on 15 February 2024, followed by a summary of responses on 30 October 2024 — this second exercise explored a range of...
FORTHCOMING CHANGES to EIS and VCT financial limits and call for evidence on tax support for entrepreneurs: At Budget 2025, the government confirmed a cut to the upfront income tax relief for an individual on the amount invested in a VCT, reducing it from 30% to 20%, while the EIS upfront relief remains at 30% for investors. It also outlined three measures covering both EIS and VCT schemes: an increase to the annual investment limits that companies can raise through EIS and VCT from £5m to £10m, and from £10m to £20m for knowledge-intensive companies ( KICs), respectively an increase in the lifetime company risk finance investment limit from £12m to £24m, and from £20m to £40m for KICs, respectively an increase in the gross assets limit that an investee company must not exceed from £15m to £30m before the shares are issued, and from £16m to £35m after that...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties reform: At Budget 2025, the government released a summary of feedback to the consultation opened at Spring Statement 2025 on behavioural penalties reform, and confirmed its plan to move ahead with proposals to revise penalties for inaccuracies in tax returns and for failures to notify chargeability. This consultation was informed by two earlier calls for evidence: an initial call for evidence, ‘ The Tax Administration Framework: Supporting a 21st Century tax system’, published on 23 March 2021, followed by a summary of responses on 30 November 2021 a second call for evidence, ‘ The Tax Administration Framework Review – enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, safeguards’, issued on 15 February 2024, with a summary of responses on 30 October 2024; this phase set out potential penalty reforms, including changes to...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties reform: At Budget 2025, the government published a summary of responses to the consultation opened at Spring Statement 2025 on behavioural penalties reform, and confirmed its intention to move forward with proposals to amend penalties for mistakes in tax returns and for failures to notify chargeability. This consultation was informed by two earlier calls for evidence: an initial call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework: Supporting a 21st Century tax system’ on 23 March 2021, with a summary of responses issued on 30 November 2021; and a second call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework Review – enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, safeguards’, on 15 February 2024, followed by a summary of responses on 30 October 2024—this second exercise set out potential options to reform...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties consultation : Building on an earlier 2021 call for evidence, on 15 February 2024 HMRC issued a further call for evidence titled “ The Tax Administration Framework Review: enquiry and assessment powers, penalties safeguards”, which set out potential routes to reform penalties, including changes to penalty suspension and escalation for ongoing or repeated non-compliance. On 30 October 2024, HMRC published the outcome, providing a summary of responses and the government’s proposed next steps. Following this, at Spring Statement 2025 on 26 March 2025, the government launched a consultation on behavioural penalties relating to penalties for inaccuracies in returns and failure to notify. The consultation outlines two possible approaches to reform these regimes: Refining the existing framework while simplifying how penalties are calculated and applied; and Exploring a more...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties consultation Building on the 2021 call for evidence, HMRC issued on 15 February 2024 a further evidence-gathering document, The Tax Administration Framework Review: enquiry and assessment powers, penalties safeguards. It set out potential penalty reforms, including changes to penalty suspension and escalation where non-compliance is ongoing or repeated. On 30 October 2024, HMRC released the outcome, providing a summary of responses and the government’s planned next steps. Following this, at Spring Statement 2025 on 26 March 2025, the government launched a consultation on reforming behavioural penalties relating to inaccuracies in returns and failure to notify. The consultation outlines two possible directions for reform: Maintain the current framework while simplifying how penalties are calculated and applied. Explore a more fundamental alternative model, with a clear separation between penalties for...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties reform: At Budget 2025, the government released a summary of feedback to the consultation launched at Spring Statement 2025 on behavioural penalty reform and confirmed plans to proceed with changes to penalties for inaccuracies in tax returns and for failures to notify chargeability. This consultation was informed by two calls for evidence: an initial call for evidence, ‘ The Tax Administration Framework: Supporting a 21st Century tax system’, issued on 23 March 2021, with a summary of responses on 30 November 2021; and a second call for evidence, ‘ The Tax Administration Framework Review – enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, safeguards’, published on 15 February 2024, followed by a summary on 30 October 2024—this later paper set out potential options for penalty reform, including revisions to penalty suspension and escalation where...
FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to penalty reform calls for evidence and behavioural penalties reform: At Budget 2025, the government released a summary of feedback to the consultation opened at Spring Statement 2025 on behavioural penalties reform, and confirmed plans to advance proposals to change penalties for errors in tax returns and for failures to notify chargeability. This work builds on two earlier calls for evidence: an initial call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework: Supporting a 21st Century tax system’ on 23 March 2021, with a summary published on 30 November 2021; a second call for evidence on ‘ The Tax Administration Framework Review–enquiry and assessment powers, penalties, safeguards’ on 15 February 2024, followed by a summary on 30 October 2024; this later exercise explored options for penalty reform, including changes to penalty suspension and the escalation of penalties for ongoing or...
FORTHCOMING CHANGES to EIS and VCT financial limits and call for evidence on tax support for entrepreneurs: At Budget 2025, the government announced that the upfront income tax relief available to an individual investing in a VCT will fall from 30% to 20%. By contrast, the upfront income tax relief for EIS remains at 30%. The government also outlined three changes affecting both the EIS and VCT schemes. Specifically, the following adjustments were confirmed: an increase to the annual investment limits that companies can raise under the EIS and VCT schemes, moving from £5m to £10m, and from £10m to £20m for knowledge-intensive companies ( KICs) an increase in the lifetime company risk finance investment limit, rising from £12m to £24m, and from £20m to £40m for KICs respectively an increase to the gross assets limit that an investee company must not...
FORTHCOMING CHANGES to EIS and VCT financial limits and call for evidence on tax support for entrepreneurs: At Budget 2025, the government set out that the upfront income tax relief available to an individual on the amount invested in a Venture Capital Trust will fall from 30% to 20%. By contrast, the upfront income tax relief for the Enterprise Investment Scheme remains unchanged at 30%. It additionally outlined three measures applying to both EIS and VCT: an uplift to the annual investment limits that companies can raise under EIS and VCT, moving from £5m to £10m, and from £10m to £20m for knowledge‑intensive companies ( KICs) an increase to the lifetime company risk finance investment limit, rising from £12m to £24m, and from £20m to £40m for KICs an increase to the gross assets limit that an investee company must not exceed, shifting from £15m to £30m before the...
FORTHCOMING CHANGES : At Budget 2025, the government opted not to proceed with a single remote betting and gaming duty, reversing an earlier consultation proposal. The decision reflects the view that remote betting (staking on real‑world events with variable odds) and remote gaming (games of chance) have different features and differing levels of harm, and so warrant distinct tax treatments. Instead, the government confirmed it will: raise the remote gaming duty from 21% to 40% from 1 April 2026 to reflect the greater harm linked to remote gaming; and bring in a new 25% GBD rate for remote betting from 1 April 2027. Remote betting on UK horse racing will be excluded from the new rate, as will bets placed via self‑service betting terminals on licensed premises. These will continue to be taxed at 15%. The government also announced that: bingo duty will be...
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
