Featured documents
Introduction to statutory interpretation The aim of statutory interpretation is to determine the legal meaning of a statute, that is, the sense that expresses the legislator’s intention. The clearest guide to that intention is the statutory wording itself, read in its context and with its overall purpose in mind, and its broader legislative setting. Courts should seek to fulfil the purpose of legislation by construing its language, so far as they can, in the manner that most effectively serves that purpose. Put differently, the courts’ default method is purposive, and every enactment is to be construed with that end in view. There is a starting presumption that the grammatical and ordinary sense of an enactment reflects the meaning intended by the legislator. Where an enactment reasonably bears only a single meaning, and no other interpretative tools or
This Practice Note addresses identifying a fiduciary, fiduciary duties and obligations, the no conflict rule, the no profit rule, a fiduciary's duty of confidence, and the remedies available for breach of fiduciary duty. Who is a fiduciary? There is no definitive catalogue of relationships that give rise to fiduciary obligations at common law in every situation universally. Certain relationships are inherently fiduciary, eg trustee and beneficiary, solicitor and client, principal and agent, business partner and co-partners, together with mortgagor and mortgagee. The obligations of some fiduciaries have been set out in statute; for instance, trustees owe a statutory duty of skill and care under section 1 of the Trustee Act 2000 (TrA 2000), and directors' relationships with their companies are addressed in the Companies Act 2006 too. For guidance on directors' fiduciary duties, see Practice Note: of directors for further detailed
Definition of ADR Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is defined in the CPR Glossary as a collective label for methods of settling disputes other than through the usual trial process. Some courts adopt the term ‘negotiated dispute resolution’ (NDR) to describe resolution by alternative means; for ease, this Practice Note uses ADR. For guidance on how ADR is addressed in the various court guides, see Practice Note: ADR and NDR in the court guides. In essence, ADR is a means of resolving a dispute outside the court system. It typically involves a neutral third party who either helps the parties reach a negotiated outcome, or issues a determination of the dispute that is legally binding. A binding result can follow where the agreement to refer the dispute to ADR so provides. There are multiple forms of ADR processes. For an outline of the different types and their
In brief The British constitution is uncodified, meaning it does not spring from a single constitutional document or code. It draws on a wide range of written and unwritten sources. Alongside the principal written sources of law in England and Wales—legislation (which has also introduced international and human rights principles into our constitution) and the common law—the constitution also rests on two further unwritten bases within this system: the prerogative, and non-legal constitutional conventions. In addition, on one view the basic or prevailing principle of our constitution, Parliamentary sovereignty, is ultimately grounded in political fact rather than in law. Legislation Legislation is the foremost source of constitutional law. Acts of Parliament may set out detailed constitutional rules, or even pass authority to create them to ministers or to others. Under the doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty, legislation is traditionally regarded as taking precedence over any other form or kind of
Most recent Practice notes
Practice Note This Practice Note explains how Brussels I and Brussels II bis apply and the breadth of their reach for jurisdiction in EU family proceedings, including deciding which Member State’s courts are competent. It further offers direction on the EU Maintenance Regulation and how it dovetails with other rules. The effects of Brexit, with a focus on transitional measures, are examined as well, in this context for practitioners considering jurisdictional issues. At 11pm ( GMT) on 31 December 2020, the UK’s transition/implementation period following departure from the EU ended. From that moment (known in UK legislation as ‘ IP completion day’), core transitional schemes ceased and wide-ranging alterations came into force across the UK’s legal framework. This affects advisers assessing which forum has authority to hear a dispute. For assistance, see Practice Note: Family proceedings with EU...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note examines how the UK’s departure from the EU influences the application of Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), when determining jurisdictional disputes. It addresses: the applicable provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU; relevant domestic legislation, including, where relevant, transitional provisions, together with the position of the EU Commission; the implications of the UK becoming a third state as a consequence of leaving the EU. It should also be noted that other jurisdictional regimes are affected by the UK leaving the EU. For guidance, see Practice Note: Brexit post implementation period—considerations for dispute resolution practitioners— Jurisdiction. For specific guidance on the position during the implementation period, see Practice Note: Brexit implementation period—jurisdiction [ Archived]......
E& W Brussels I (recast)—application to third states [ Archived] ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note reviews how Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), applies to disputes involving non- EU Member States (often called third states). It highlights the provisions in that regulation capable of applying to such situations—each concerning jurisdiction—and considers the implications for the UK when those provisions are applied after its withdrawal from the EU. Definitions This Practice Note uses a number of definitions: European Communities Act 1972— ECA 1972 European Union ( Withdrawal) Act 2018— EU( W) A 2018 European Union ( Withdrawal Agreement) Act 2020— EU( WA) A 2020 exit day—defined by EU( W) A 2018, s 20, as 31 January 2020 at 11 pm Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements concluded on 30 June 2005 at The...
This Practice Note This Practice Note examines the incorporation of a jurisdiction clause into a contract by reference to either: standard terms and conditions the wording of a separate contract It offers a general overview of the position in relation to charter-parties and bills of lading, as well as insurance and reinsurance. It also includes examples of provisions that courts have found did not succeed in importing jurisdiction clauses from one agreement into another. The Note refers to decisions under the Brussels Convention, Regulation ( EC) 44/2001, Brussels I, and Regulation ( EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) (the Brussels Regime), where those authorities give broad guidance on how the courts approach the incorporation of jurisdiction agreements. For detailed guidance on the courts’ approach to whether a jurisdiction clause has been incorporated into a...
This Practice Note explores jurisdiction agreements (choice of court agreements): what they achieve, why they are adopted, and comparable arrangements pursuing the same objective. It outlines the main categories of jurisdiction agreement together with remedies available if one is breached. For assistance distinguishing the different types, see: Determining court jurisdiction—overview. It is likewise essential to grasp the operation of any formal jurisdictional regime. For insight into which regimes may apply, see Practice Note: Jurisdiction rules. A principal regime is the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. That convention applies between the UK and other contracting states in proceedings where the parties have entered into an exclusive jurisdiction agreement... What is a jurisdiction agreement? A jurisdiction agreement is the parties’ undertaking specifying which court(s) will have authority to determine disputes that could arise between them. For clarity on the concept of...
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note concerns the judicial pension scheme created by the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 (referred to as the Judicial Pension Scheme 1993 ( JPS 1993) or JUPRA). It is no longer maintained. The Practice Note also includes references to the Judicial Pension Scheme 1981 ( JPS 1981). Statutory framework The Judicial Pension Scheme comprises several schemes: JPS 1981. Salaried judges appointed before 31 March 1995 generally belong to this unfunded final salary scheme, which was set up under the Judicial Pensions Act 1981 ( JPA 1981) JUPRA. Salaried judges appointed between 31 March 1995 and 31 March 2015 usually belong to this unfunded final salary scheme, which was established under the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 ( JPRA 1993). Note that: there is a right of election to move from the JPS 1981 to JUPRA at any time up to a...
This month the Competition and Markets Authority ( CMA) opened a consultation on suggested amendments to its merger-control guidance covering jurisdiction and procedure. CMA launches consultation on proposed changes to its merger control guidance on jurisdiction and procedure On 20 June 2025, the CMA commenced a consultation on updates to its guidance on jurisdiction and procedure ( CMA2), as well as to the merger notice template. These proposals seek to embed the authority’s new ‘4P’s’ framework—pace, predictability, process, and proportionality—throughout its mergers process. The package includes: clarifications to how the CMA applies the ‘material influence’ and ‘share of supply’ tests revisions concerning the CMA’s treatment of global mergers changes to pre-notification and the phase 1 merger process, along with amendments to the current merger notice template Clarifications to the CMA’s ‘material influence’ and ‘share of supply’ tests The CMA may claim...
This June 2022 monthly round-up notes the passage of amendments to China’s Anti- Monopoly Law (including adjustments to the merger control regime), as well as the launch of a new consultation on additional proposed amendments to China’s merger control thresholds, the publication of a draft bill in Finland to reduce merger control thresholds, the introduction of revised notification thresholds in Kosovo, and the resumption of the merger control review process in Ukraine... China—amendments passed on Anti- Monopoly Law including in relation to merger; new consultation launched proposing changes to merger control thresholds On 24 June 2022, the 35th meeting of the 13th National People’s Congress Standing Committee approved amendments to the Anti- Monopoly Law ( AML). In respect of merger control, the principal changes are: higher penalties for gun-jumping. For an unnotified merger that does not raise competition concerns, the maximum fine rises from RMB...
This month notably brought approval by the German Parliament of amendments to the German Competition Act (including revisions to Germany’s merger control framework), both a shortening in Spain of the deadline for mergers filed via the short-form route together with an extension to the phase 2 timetable, and, in the US, the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice releasing draft merger guidelines for consultation. Germany—parliament approves amendments to the Competition Act; increases the target company threshold allowing the FCO to investigate mergers after a sector inquiry has been completed On 6 July 2023, the German Parliament ( Bundestag) adopted the Competition Enforcement Act, revising the Act Against Restraints of Competition (the Competition Act) for the 11th time overall. For merger control, the Federal Cartel Office ( FCO) gains a new call-in power following a sector inquiry where both of the following are...
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note is no longer updated and is provided solely for background reference. Additionally, certain links might not point to the provisions as they stood on the date the guidance in this Practice Note was issued. For more details on earlier and/or later amendments to the CPR, consult: CPR updates—overview and Procedure Rule Committee minutes—overview......
Civil justice reform: Consult our Practice Note, Civil justice reform in Scotland—virtual hearings and electronic submission of documents, for advice on the present rules and procedures of the Scottish civil courts regarding remote hearings and the digital signing, sending and lodging of documents. The Practice Note also addresses the approach to making and/or answering a judicial tender in proceedings involving a single pursuer and a single defender in Scotland today......
This Practice Note examines judicial tenders in the setting of Scottish civil actions involving multiple parties, in particular where a plurality of parties is present. It outlines sources of related guidance and mechanisms. For guidance on the following, see: additional matters concerning judicial tenders in Scotland, see Practice Notes: Tenders in Scottish civil litigation—nature, purpose and expenses implications, and Making and responding to judicial tenders in Scottish civil litigation alternative extra-judicial settlement routes in Scottish civil proceedings, see Practice Notes: Alternative dispute resolution in Scotland, and Pursuers’ offers in Scottish civil proceedings the nearest counterpart in civil proceedings in England and Wales, see Settlement and settling disputes—overview, which summarises the subject and links to detailed guidance on settlement options in England and Wales, including Practice Notes: Settling disputes—settlement offers ( Calderbank, WPSAC and Part 36) and Without prejudice...
This Practice Note This note introduces judicial separation proceedings issued before 6 April 2022. It outlines the need to establish one of the five facts under section 1 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973—adultery, unreasonable behaviour, desertion, two years’ separation with consent, or five years’ separation. It also describes the legal consequences of a decree of judicial separation. The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 ( DDSA 2020) took effect on 6 April 2022. Cases issued by the court on or after 6 April 2022 are governed by DDSA 2020 and by procedural amendments to the Family Procedure Rules 2010, SI 2010/2955. For more detail, see Practice Note: Introduction to the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020. Applications issued by the court on or before 5 April 2022 continue under the pre‑ DDSA 2020 regime. Those matters are unaffected by the...
Practice Note This Practice Note sets out which documents were required when starting judicial separation proceedings that began before 6 April 2022. It highlights the necessary paperwork, including the notice of proceedings and the acknowledgement of service. It also outlines what action to take if the marriage certificate cannot be located. The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 ( DDSA 2020) took effect on 6 April 2022. Matters issued by the court on or after 6 April 2022 are governed by DDSA 2020 and by procedural changes under the amended Family Procedure Rules 2010, SI 2010/2955. For further information, see Practice Note: Introduction to the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 and Commencing and filing an application for a divorce, dissolution or judicial separation order (post- DDSA 2020). Proceedings issued by the court on or before 5 April 2022 continue under the pre‑ DDSA 2020 law....
This Practice Note relates to proceedings that were commenced prior to 6 April 2022. It outlines how to begin judicial separation proceedings, and what action to take where a prior petition is already on the file. It also offers practical guidance for preparing a petition, including when to withhold the petitioner’s address, what particulars must be set out, and the approach to drafting a statement of case. The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 ( DDSA 2020) took effect on 6 April 2022. Proceedings issued by the court on or after 6 April 2022 are governed by DDSA 2020 and the procedural changes introduced under the amended Family Procedure Rules 2010, SI 2010/2955. For additional detail, see Practice Notes: Introduction to the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 and Commencing and filing an application for a divorce, dissolution or judicial separation order (post- DDSA...
This Practice Note sets out the judicial review ground commonly termed unreasonableness, also referred to as irrationality. Unreasonableness as a Ground of Judicial Review ‘ Irrationality’ is the second of the three judicial review grounds identified by Lord Diplock in the landmark Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service ( GCHQ). He portrayed it as a decision so affronting logic or accepted moral standards that no reasonable person, having properly applied his mind to the matter, could have reached it. Courts now often prefer the term ‘unreasonableness’ to ‘irrationality’, though the labels are used interchangeably. This Practice Note will consider the core elements of reasonableness as a ground of judicial review: the evolution of reasonableness review, the Wednesbury benchmark of reasonableness, the two limbs of unreasonableness, unreasonable...
STOP PRESS: This Practice Note is currently in the process of being revised to reflect amendments to the Sponsor Guidance that took effect on 6 March 2026. See the News Analysis: Detailed list of the Home Office’s Sponsor Guidance changes of 6 March 2026. A refusal by the Secretary of State for the Home Department ( SSHD), acting through the Home Office, to grant a Workers and Temporary Workers sponsor licence carries no right of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal ( Immigration and Asylum Chamber), although a ‘pre‑licence error correction’ process has been available since 6 April 2016. Decisions to suspend, downgrade or revoke sponsor licences attract no right of appeal or review. Operating a sponsor licensing regime without an appeal to an independent tribunal has been held to comply with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 (right to a fair...
This practical overview sets out, at a high level, the procedural actions a claimant ought to take when bringing a judicial review claim. It addresses the process up to the court’s decision on whether to give permission to pursue judicial review. Only the stage up to the court’s determination on whether to grant permission to apply for judicial review is covered. For the potential grounds and available remedies, see the Practice Notes on this topic: Grounds of judicial review—illegality, Grounds of judicial review—unreasonableness, Grounds of judicial review—procedural impropriety, Grounds of judicial review—breach of legitimate expectation and Remedies in judicial review. Those notes address the bases relied upon and the remedies available therein. Send a letter before claim and comply with the pre-action protocol Where a person considers that a body exercising a public function has taken a potentially unlawful decision, one should, if the relevant...
Statutory framework The Judicial Pension Scheme comprises a range of arrangements: Judicial Pension Scheme 1981 ( JPS 1981). Salaried judges appointed before 31 March 1995 typically fall within this unfunded, final salary arrangement, created under the Judicial Pensions Act 1981 ( JPA 1981) Judicial Pension Scheme 1993 ( JPS 1993 or JUPRA). Salaried judges appointed between 31 March 1995 and 31 March 2015 generally participate in this unfunded, final salary arrangement, established under the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 ( JPRA 1993). Note that: there is a right to elect to move from JPS 1981 to JUPRA at any point up to six months after retirement. For further details, see: Eligibility, below the Ministry of Justice ( Mo J) conducted an options exercise in 2023 enabling certain members of the Judicial Pension Scheme 2015 ( JPS 2015) to make a...
Relevant articles The Journal of World Energy Law and Business ( JWELB) serves as the official publication of The Association of International Energy Negotiators ( AIEN) (previously The Association of International Petroleum Negotiators ( AIPN)) and carries pieces on legal, commercial and policy matters within the international energy sector, covering upstream oil and gas transactions, finance, taxation, regulation, dispute management, alternative energy resources, energy policy and security, and international energy organisations. These works, addressing both domestic and international topics, may interest energy lawyers and are accessible via links from this page. These articles are available solely to Lexis+® subscribers. Publication Date Article Jurisdiction Brief description of article 1 December 2024 — Good Oilfield Practice: its history and evolution — J World Energy Law Bus (2024) 17 (6): 351 — World. Good Oilfield Practice defines the standards by which oil and gas operators conduct their...
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
