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
Tracker overview This UK Listing Rules ( UKLR) tracker presents an overview of recent and forthcoming amendments to the UKLR sourcebook, together with connected legislative and regulatory developments, guidance and updates. The UKLR sourcebook took effect on 29 July 2024 following a reorganisation of the listing regime. The tracker also signposts consultation papers, policy statements, practical guidance and notices issued by the Financial Conduct Authority ( FCA). For comprehensive information on the reshaping of the listing regime, see Practice Note: Reform of the UK listing regime—fundamentals. For destination tables showing where provisions from the former Listing Rules now appear within the UKLR (to the extent they have been carried across into the new rules), see Practice Note: Listing Rules to UK Listing Rules—destination tables. Developments in 2026 Date: 06/03/2026 Document: FCA Quarterly Consultation No 51 — CP26/8: clarificatory changes to UKLR provisions on...
STOP PRESS: A major overhaul of the UK listing regime took effect on 29 July 2024, removing the premium and standard listing segments and introducing a single listing category for equity shares in commercial companies. This commercial companies category is strongly disclosure-led and sits alongside other listing categories, such as the categories for shell companies, secondary listing and closed ended investment funds. A new UK Listing Rules sourcebook was introduced to deliver these reforms, and the earlier Listing Rules sourcebook was withdrawn. For more detail, see Practice Note: Reform of the UK listing regime—fundamentals. This Practice Note describes the listing framework as it stood before 29 July 2024. It concentrates on moving a company from AIM to the Main Market for listed securities ( Main Market) of the London Stock Exchange ( LSE), outlining the benefits and drawbacks and the steps...
This Practice Note offers a primer on the agreement. It sets out the scope, the three categories of prohibited subsidies, the notification and transparency obligations, and dispute resolution. It also highlights other provisions relevant to the agreement. Introduction The AFS was agreed at the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference in June 2022 in Geneva. It forms part of a set of key trade initiatives known as the ‘ Geneva Package’. Other outcomes include: Ministerial Decision on TRIPS Non-violation and Situation Complaints Ministerial Declaration on Responding to modern Sanitary and Phytosanitary Challenges Ministerial Declaration on the Emergency Response to Food Insecurity Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement, and Ministerial Declaration on the WTO Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Preparedness for Future Pandemics Negotiations on the AFS began in 2001 during the Doha Round. It is only the second...
This Practice Note forms part of a cross‑jurisdictional guide that examines crucial aspects of creating particular business entities worldwide. Member firms of the Multilaw global network respond to core queries on the subject. It highlights the main points to consider when establishing a private limited company in Pakistan. Current as at 13 January 2023. Author: Ahmed Farooq and Malik Haseeb Ahmad, Meer & Hasan, a Multilaw member firm Common entities 1. Which entity type does this questionnaire focus on? Which other commonly used forms in this jurisdiction are dealt with in separate questionnaires? This response relates to the private limited company (styled XYZ ( Pvt) Limited). 2. Identify other entity types available locally that exist but are not covered here: public companies that are listed public companies that are not listed single‑member companies not‑for‑profit limited companies limited liability...
This Practice Note forms part of a cross-border guide that explains essential considerations in setting up specific business vehicles across worldwide jurisdictions. Leading law firms within the Multilaw global network respond to central questions on this area. This edition sets out the key points to consider when registering a registered overseas company in New Zealand. Current as at 13 January 2023. Authors: Mark Lowndes and Kerri Dewe, Tompkins Wake, a Multilaw member firm Common entities Which entity type does this questionnaire address? Which other commonly used entities in this jurisdiction are covered in a different questionnaire? This response concerns the registered overseas company (branch/representative office). The limited liability company ( LLC) is dealt with in a distinct response prepared separately. Name other entity types available locally that are not presently covered by a questionnaire: Sole...
This Practice Note forms part of a multi‑jurisdictional guide that covers the essential elements of creating specific business entities around the world. Leading law firms within the Multilaw global network respond to key questions on the subject. This guide sets out the primary considerations when establishing a limited liability company in New Zealand. Current as at 13 January 2023. Authors: Mark Lowndes and Kerri Dewe, Tompkins Wake, a Multilaw member firm Common entities Which entity form is addressed in this questionnaire? Which other commonly used forms in this jurisdiction are treated in another questionnaire? The focus here is the limited liability company. The registered overseas company is covered in a separate response. Identify other entity types in your jurisdiction that exist but are not covered by a questionnaire at this time: Sole...
This Practice Note forms part of a cross‑border guide covering core issues in establishing particular business vehicles worldwide. Top law firms within the Multilaw global network respond to pivotal queries on this subject. The guide outlines principal considerations for setting up a private limited liability company in Myanmar. Updated as at 22 September 2025. Authored by Yuwadee Thean‑ngarm, Tilleke & Gibbins Myanmar Limited, a Multilaw member firm. Common entities This response centres on the private limited liability company (tarwon kant-that-htar-thi amyar-hnint ma-thet-sai-thi company). The Myanmar transliteration of private limited liability company is tarwon kant-that-htar-thi amyar-hnint ma-thet-sai-thi company, and its official abbreviations are Ltd. ( Limited) or Co., Ltd. ( Company Limited). In Myanmar, this vehicle is referred to both as a Limited Company and simply as a company... Other entity types in this jurisdiction, not addressed by a separate questionnaire at this time,...
This Practice Note is part of a cross‑jurisdictional guide that covers key facets of forming specific business entities across global jurisdictions. Member firms within the Multilaw network supply responses to the core questions. This edition sets out the main considerations when establishing a limited liability company in China. Current as at 8 September 2025. Authors: Lixin Cui and Henry Shi, Jun He LLP, a Multilaw member firm. Common entities The subject of this questionnaire is the limited liability company ( LLC). Other entity types that exist in this jurisdiction but are not covered here include: Partnership Company limited by shares Financial institution, and Non-profit organisation General principles Main legal...
This Practice Note sits within a multi-jurisdictional guide that covers the key elements of establishing particular business entities worldwide. Leading firms in the Multilaw global network respond to core questions on the subject. This guide outlines the principal issues when setting up a private limited company in Cambodia. Current as of 23 July 2024. Author: Jay Cohen and Mealtey Oeurn, Tilleke & Gibbins, a Multilaw member firm... Common entities What form of entity is the subject of this questionnaire? Which other commonly used entities in this jurisdiction are dealt with in another questionnaire? Private limited company ( Kromhoun Elachon Tortoul Khos Trov Mean Komrith) (subject of this response)... Identify other entity types in your jurisdiction that exist but are not covered by a questionnaire at this time: General partnership ( Kromhoun...
This Practice Note forms part of a multi-jurisdictional guide covering key aspects of creating particular business entities worldwide. Leading law firms within the Multilaw global network respond to essential questions on this theme. This note outlines important points when establishing a private trading trust in Australia. Current as at 13 January 2023. Author: Paul Kirton, Macpherson Kelley, a Multilaw member firm. Common entities Which form of entity is addressed by this questionnaire, and which other commonly used entities here are dealt with in a separate response? This response concerns the private trading trust (trading trust). The privately owned company is considered in another response. Identify other entity types in this jurisdiction that exist but are not the subject of a questionnaire at this time: Public company ...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub records the position as at the judgment of 27 June 2024 and is not maintained. See further: timeline, Case facts, Outline. Appeals were brought against the General Court’s rulings that in part upheld the Commission’s decision of 9 July 2014 imposing fines on Servier and several generic rivals for conduct delaying the generic entry of perindopril ( AT.39612). Outcome On 27 June 2024, the Court of Justice delivered its judgment. It rejected the appeals of Lupin, Niche Generics, Unichem Laboratories, Matrix, Tevan and Biogaran, thereby confirming the General Court’s findings that the agreements concluded by Servier and Biogaran amounted to market-exclusion arrangements and restricted competition, so those companies remain liable for the Commission’s fines. The Court of Justice largely upheld the General Court’s ruling in Servier’s own appeal, but annulled certain elements concerning the length of the...
This Practice Note considers negligence and contractual claims against auction houses and valuers in relation to artworks. It reviews four decisions, drawing out how the courts have approached questions concerning the issues below: The focus is on how those issues have been dealt with judicially. the attribution of artwork (see Practice Note: Art law-authenticity, provenance and attribution of artworks) the duty owed and the appropriate standard of care in such cases the assessment and quantification of damages It should be noted that negligence claims about objects of art are highly fact-dependent. The terrain is complex in legal, evidential and related respects. This Practice Note provides a concise overview of select key themes; securing specialist advice at the earliest possible stage to navigate the complexities will almost invariably be sensible. For an introduction to art law for Private Client...
STOP PRESS : On 18 March 2026, the Pension Protection Fund ( PPF) issued its levy policy statement and the final rules for 2026/27, together with guidance for pension schemes on meeting the levy rule requirements, and setting out how the PPF intends to operate in areas where the rules allow discretion. The accompanying guidance explains how schemes should demonstrate compliance with the levy requirements and clarifies the PPF’s expected approach wherever discretion applies. The PPF’s policy statement and final rules for 2026/27 implement its earlier announcement confirming that no PPF levy will be charged to conventional schemes for 2026/27, while a proportionate, risk-based Alternative Covenant Schemes ( ACS) levy will be retained. The existing ACS framework is largely unchanged; however, the PPF has committed to accelerate its review of the ACS levy methodology to ensure it remains...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub reflects the position as at the judgment dated 9 March 2023; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. This page remains as a record of that position only and is not curated thereafter. Please refer to the timeline. Case facts Outline Appeal brought against the General Court’s judgments in Cases T- 255/1, T–254/17 and T- 249/17, which partially annulled the Commission’s decisions in AT.40466 and AT.40467 authorising dawn raids concerning suspected exchanges of information between companies operating in the supply of hygiene and cleaning products. Outcome On 9 March 2023, the Court of Justice delivered its judgments, setting aside in part the General Court’s rulings and, consequently, annulling the Commission’s decisions ordering the dawn raids. In particular, the Court of Justice found (among other things) that the Commission should have recorded interviews conducted with suppliers of those...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub records the position as at the judgment dated 9 March 2023 and is no longer updated. See further: timeline, Case facts, Outline. Outline Appeal against the General Court’s judgment in Case T‑430/18, which dismissed an action seeking annulment of the Commission decision granting grandfathering rights over slots released under commitments in Case COMP/ M.6607- US Airways/ American Airlines. Outcome On 16 March 2023, the Court of Justice delivered its ruling, rejecting the appeal in full. It found, among other points, that: the General Court correctly read “appropriate use” as denoting the absence of “misuse”; its assessment of the slot utilisation threshold consistent with no “misuse” was sound, as the commitments did not require a rate above industry practice; Delta was not required to exhaust all allocated slot capacity; and the General Court did not err in its...
CASE HUB NOTE-appeal lodged before the Court of Justice in Case C- 611/22 ARCHIVED -this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 13 July 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline Case facts Outline Appeal before the General Court seeking to set aside the Commission’s decisions of 19 April 2021, by which it accepted a referral under Article 22 EUMR concerning Illumina, Inc.’s proposed acquisition of GRAIL, Inc. ( M.10188). Latest development On 13 July 2022, the General Court handed down its judgment, dismissing Illumina’s action in full. It rejected Illumina’s contention that the Commission lacked authority under Article 22 EUMR to review a concentration referred by a Member State that operates its own merger control regime, even where, on the facts, that transaction fell outside the scope of that domestic...
Case T- 886/19 Design Light & Led Made in Europe and Design Luce & Led Made in Italy v Commission (rejection of complaint) [ Archived] CASE HUB ARCHIVED - this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 13 July 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline An action before the General Court challenging the European Commission’s decision of 25 October 2019 to dismiss a complaint alleging violations of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU by Koninklijke Philips N. V., said to arise from its licensing practices in the LED lighting sector ( AT.39913). Latest developments On 13 July 2022, the General Court delivered its ruling, rejecting the appeal in full. The Court found, amongst other points, that the Commission had not: (i) unlawfully used its discretion by deciding against carrying out a more far‑reaching...
‘ The attribution of works of art to particular artists is often a matter of great controversy ’ (per Sir Raymond Evershed MR) The art market’s value keeps rising, and linking a piece to a specific creator can dramatically influence its price. As Jordan Holland, a barrister working in art law, has noted, a sought-after attribution can lift a work from tens of thousands of pounds into the tens of millions. Combined with the arrival of new collectors, buyers and art investors, it is unsurprising that the court is increasingly called upon to address the attribution of art and cultural property. In doing so, it must confront questions unlike those it ordinarily faces. See: The approach of the English court to connoisseurship, provenance and technical analysis, Jordan Holland, Dec. 2012, Art Antiquity & Law ( Vol. 17, Issue 4), Institute of Art and Law (not...
This note collates and condenses legislation, guidance, rulings and wider policy updates that illuminate how competition regulators worldwide address labour market competition concerns (ie wage‑fixing and no‑poach agreements, etc) and reveals their evolving stance in this area. 2026 Jurisdiction and body Details Developments Portugal ( Autoridade Da Concorrenca) The Ad C imposes €4.5m in fines on two associations of temporary work agencies for agreeing not to poach staff, thereby curbing competition in the labour market — Press release published—13/03/2026 UK ( Competition and Markets Authority) The CMA issues its response to the Department for Business and Trade’s working paper on potential reforms to non‑compete clauses in employment contracts — CMA response published—25/02/2026 Poland ( Office of Competition and Consumer Protection) UOKi K confirms it has conducted inspections in the electronic equipment sector and suspects the firms involved may have, among other conduct, concluded no‑poaching...
This tracker compiles notifications from EU and EEA competition authorities on dawn raids into suspected breaches of competition law, as well as the foreign subsidies regime, from 2018 onwards. 2026 dawn raids Autorité de la concurrence ( France): Food supplements and dermo‑cosmetic products; Unknown; Restrictive agreements; PR 06/05/2026; Raid 05/05/2026. Consiliul Concurenţei ( Romania): Security services; SGPI, TMG Guard, Ambassador Group, Team Force; Restrictive agreements—bid rigging; PR 06/05/2026; Raid 06/05/2026. European Commission: Chocolate confectionery; Unknown; Restrictive agreements and abuse of dominance; PR 13/04/2026; Raid Unknown. Commission for Protection of Competition ( Bulgaria): IT equipment; 2 unknown undertakings; Restrictive agreements—bid rigging; PR 01/04/2026; Raid 01/04/2026. Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato ( Italy): Meal vouchers and substitute canteen services; Edenred; Abuse of dominance; PR 26/03/2026; Raid 25/03/2026. Anti-monopoly Office ( Slovakia): Optical networks; 4 unknown...
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
