Legal Practice Notes

This month has brought updated merger control thresholds across Argentina, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Columbia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Peru, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and the USA. New thresholds have also taken effect in China, Ukraine and Uruguay. In addition, COMESA has opened a consultation on its draft Competition and Consumer Protection Regulations. Argentina—annual revision to notification thresholds Argentina has implemented revised notification thresholds following the yearly uplift in the value of adjustable units, the metric underpinning the filing triggers. A deal must now be notified where the parties’ combined turnover in Argentina surpasses ARS 50.6bn (approximately EUR 59.9m/ US$ 172.9m), increased from ARS 16.2bn, unless: the aggregate value of assets transferred in Argentina is no more than ARS 10.1bn (approximately EUR 31.9m/ US$ 34.5m) the overall price payable for the transaction in Argentina does not exceed ARS 10.1bn...

ARCHIVED: this Practice Note has been archived, is not maintained, and is offered solely for background information. Furthermore, some links may no longer direct you to the relevant provisions as they existed at the time the guidance in this Practice Note was first published. For those who have already reviewed the Practice Note: Jackson reforms three months on [ Archived], we have highlighted the fresh material added to take account of information introduced during the period 1 July 2013 to 30 September. Overall approach by the courts to the Jackson reforms: NEW In the reported decisions, the courts are continuing to apply a strict approach when addressing parties who have failed to comply with CPR provisions. Jeremy Richardson J summarised this in Baker, noting that there is now a significantly greater emphasis on compliance across all courts......

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived, is no longer maintained, and is supplied for background reference only. In addition, some links may not lead you to the provisions as they stood on the date the guidance in this Practice Note was issued. Jackson Reforms—one year on To align with the significant April CPR amendments, we are pleased to unveil a multimedia update charting the development and effect of the Jackson reforms across the past 12 months. Recorded to mark the first anniversary of the reforms’ implementation, the discussion examines: Litigation risk transfer ( CFAs, DBAs, ATE and third-party funding) Relief from sanctions, proposed changes to Part 3 and costs budgets, and the proposed review of Part 36 Disclosure developments, the interaction with costs budgeting, and practical consequences The panel comprises Neil Smith, Head of Lexis+® UK Dispute Resolution Group; Keith Levene, Legal Director ( Costs Lawyer) at Pinsent Masons; Edward...

ARCHIVED This archived Practice Note is not maintained and is provided solely for background information. Further, some of the hyperlinks may no longer direct you to the provisions as they stood at the date the guidance in this Practice Note was published. Costs budgeting Costs budgeting is presented as a cornerstone of the reforms, seeking to bring control to expenditure during litigation and to ensure costs are kept within reasonable and proportionate bounds. Against that backdrop, what, over the past three months, has been done to help practitioners understand how all of this will operate in practice? Exemptions—will they remain in place? The first point to make is that the court-specific exemptions have been under scrutiny since before the reforms even took effect. A sub-committee of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee has now been convened to consult on whether the costs budgeting exemptions ought to remain....

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is for historical purposes only. On 1 April 2013, a fresh regime for the management of litigation costs in England and Wales came into effect. Traditional costs estimates, in their previous guise, were swept away, with formal costs budgets installed in their stead. As a central plank of the Jackson Reforms, the aim was to allow the courts to supervise parties’ expenditure during proceedings, thereby ensuring that spending remained reasonable and proportionate—not only by reference to the value of the dispute, but also so that court time was used proportionately across all court users. Despite the substantial time and effort invested in the Jackson Reforms, it was soon recognised that the exemption rules merited further consideration. A consultation has produced an amendment to the costs budgeting exemption, which is due to take effect on 22 April 2014, together with other...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. NOTE: This Practice Note offers a synopsis of the effect of the Jackson reforms across the 12 months to 1 April 2014 and excludes any developments beyond that point in time. A principal aim of the civil litigation costs review (which concluded in the Jackson Reforms of April 2013) was to determine how case management procedures influence costs overall and to assess whether alterations in process and/or procedure might ultimately deliver more proportionate costs......

The debtor’s proposal for an IVA The route into an IVA commences with the debtor’s proposal, ordinarily shaped in collaboration with a licensed insolvency practitioner ( IP). At this juncture, the IP acts as the nominee. Should creditors accept the proposal, the nominee will typically take up the role of supervisor of the IVA. For broader background, see Practice Note: Individual voluntary arrangements ( IVAs). The nominee must adhere to Statement of Insolvency Practice 3.1, updated for nominees appointed on or after 1 March 2023—see News Analysis: LNB News 01/03/2023 13. Any debtor may advance an IVA proposal, including an individual who remains an undischarged bankrupt. The nominee will commonly meet the debtor, who will supply information on assets and liabilities, supported by documentation. Although the debtor puts forward the terms, the written proposal is, in practice, drafted by the nominee. The proposal will include a...

Who is the nominee/supervisor and what is their role in the individual voluntary arrangement? The nominee and the supervisor play central roles in an IVA. Often, one professional fills both positions, although this is not a necessity. The nominee’s duties extend only up to the point when the IVA proposal is accepted or declined. If creditors approve the proposal, the supervisor then assumes responsibility for ensuring the arrangement is delivered exactly in line with its terms. No person may act as nominee or supervisor in an IVA unless they are a licensed insolvency practitioner ( IP), a safeguard that provides independent scrutiny and professional supervision. Under section 253(2) of the Insolvency Act 1986 and rule 8.3 of the Insolvency ( England and Wales) Rules 2016 ( SI 2016/1024), the IVA proposal must include: the proposed supervisor’s name, address,...

Duration of an individual voluntary arrangement An individual voluntary arrangement ( IVA) is a formal arrangement between a person and their creditors under the Insolvency Act 1986 ( IA 1986). It functions as a contract between the parties, prepared by the individual and put before creditors for a decision. The debtor proposes how long the IVA should run, and the length will often be shaped by the planned source of funds. Where contributions come from ongoing trading income, a longer term is typically required, whereas a sizeable lump sum can shorten the timetable. An insolvency practitioner ( IP) will advise and guide the debtor, seek appointment as nominee, and, if approved, would usually act as supervisor, though the final proposal remains the debtor’s choice. Creditors then consider the terms and decide whether to accept them. An IVA may span anything from a few weeks or...

Specific income tax rules Specific income tax provisions (contained in sections 471–484 of the Income Tax ( Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003, Part 7, Chapter 5 ( ITEPA 2003)) govern securities options that are connected with employment. These are the relevant provisions that usually bring unapproved share options within the scope of income tax. For broader guidance on unapproved options, see Practice Note: Unapproved share options. For details on employment‑related securities, see Practice Note: What is an employment‑related security? Alternative rules apply to options issued under the statutory tax‑advantaged share option schemes, namely enterprise management incentives ( EMI), save as you earn ( SAYE) and company share option plans ( CSOPs). For more detailed guidance on the tax position of these options, see the following Practice Notes: Enterprise management incentives ( EMI)—income tax and NIC treatment of options EMI— CGT, including business asset disposal relief and...

This Practice Note deals with the specific rules applying to employment-related securities acquired for less than market value contained within Chapter 3C, Part 7 of Income Tax ( Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 ( ITEPA 2003) For the definition of employment-related securities, see Practice Note: What is an employment-related security? Where the provisions apply, an employee or director who obtains shares or other securities: is regarded as having an interest-free, notional loan (see: below), and is charged to income tax each year on the benefit of that loan as though it were a real employment-related loan (see: below). Further income tax (and potentially National Insurance contribution ( NIC)) liabilities may arise when the notional loan is treated as discharged, for example on a disposal of the securities (see: below). In this Practice Note, these rules are called the ‘notional loan’...

This Practice Note reviews how state immunity intersects with arbitration proceedings in Italy. For a general introduction to state immunity and arbitration, see Practice Note: State immunity and arbitration—general considerations. For Practice Notes on state immunity across multiple jurisdictions (including England and Wales), consult our state immunity subtopic: State immunity and arbitration—overview. The Italian approach to state immunity Italy has long contributed to the development of the doctrine of state immunity, moving from an absolute model—anchored in the traditional principle par in parem non habet iudicium—towards a more refined restrictive approach. Italian courts, together with their Belgian counterparts, were among the first to challenge absolute immunity in the early twentieth century. At present, Italy follows the restrictive doctrine, limiting immunity to acts performed iure imperii—namely, manifestations of sovereign authority—while excluding acts undertaken iure gestionis, including those of a commercial or private-law character....

Loan market and developments The loan landscape has shifted in response to the economic and financial downturn. That crisis exposed weaknesses in a corporate funding paradigm built predominantly on bank lending, underscoring the requirement for alternative financing channels. According to the Bank of Italy, lending contracted during the crisis, most notably for SMEs, confirming the Italian market’s negative trajectory despite greater liquidity across the system. With fewer loans available, transactions were predominantly arranged as club deals or as bilateral facilities, while only a small number of financings were arranged on a syndicated basis. These patterns emerged notwithstanding the notable increase in liquidity within the system. Syndicated transactions were the exception rather than the rule, appearing only in limited circumstances. The Italian market nevertheless experienced some activity in the issuance of bonds by large corporates outside the banking sector, providing a partial and...

NOTE—to check whether notification thresholds in Italy and around the world are met, see: Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Italian merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Italy? A key recent change to the Italian merger control framework was introduced in 2022, granting the Italian Competition Authority ( ICA) the power to examine below-threshold deals. Further, Italian rules have been fine-tuned to align with the principles and provisions of Council Regulation ( EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation), a text with EEA relevance ( EUMR). Article 16.1 of Law No. 287 of 10 October 1990 ( Italian Competition Law, ICL 1990) provides that a concentration must be notified to the ICA prior to...

This table outlines concluded investigations by Italy’s competition authority (the Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato— AGCM) into alleged cartels, anti‑competitive agreements and abuses of dominant positions ( Articles 101/102 TFEU and national equivalents) since 2015. Note—only investigations that have been made public are reflected here. 2026 Investigations under Article 101 TFEU/ Article 2 of the Law No. 287/90 Mid-range jewellery — Morellato Issues: Restrictive agreements— RPM Developments: Infringement decision adopted—31/03/2026; fines totalling €25,895,043 imposed Broadband — Fibercop; TIM Issues: Restrictive agreements—exclusivity clauses Developments: Commitments accepted—23/02/2026 ...

Updated in April 2026 Introduction Italy is a parliamentary republic with a two‑chamber system. The Prime Minister serves as Head of Government. Parliament comprises the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate. The President of the Republic designates the Prime Minister, who must obtain Parliament’s confidence. The President’s term spans seven years. Parliamentary general elections are held every five years. Italy follows a civil law tradition. Its legal sources comprise the Constitution, statutes, secondary legislation, EU regulations (directly applicable and not requiring implementation) and EU directives (which must be enacted through national legislation). The nation is organised into 20 regions. The Constitution grants regions legislative powers in specific fields, including public health, education, agriculture and tourism. Italy is a founding member of the EU. Business environment Italy ranks among the world’s largest economies, typically within the top ten by GDP, and is Europe’s...

Banking regulation— Italy— Q& A guide This Practice Note provides a jurisdiction-specific Q& A overview of banking regulation in Italy, published within the Lexology Getting the Deal Through series by Law Business Research (law stated as at 24 January 2023). Authors: Ughi e Nunziante— Marcello Gioscia; Gianluigi Pugliese; Benedetto Colosimo; Alessandro Corbò. 1. What are the principal governmental and regulatory policies that govern the banking sector? The Italian framework is grounded in protecting the sound, prudent conduct of supervised entities and in maintaining the stability, efficiency and competitiveness of the broader banking and financial system. Over the past three decades, the sector’s design has been driven by Italy’s obligations as an EU member, requiring compliance with EU principles and rules. In this setting, EU-level prudential supervision applies, addressing, among other matters, banks’ capital adequacy, large exposures and risk concentration, governance arrangements and internal control systems, and the types of...

Historically, arrangements labelled ‘outsourcing’ were typically understood to involve handing over an existing in‑house operation to a specialist third‑party supplier (see: Traditional IT outsourcing below). As commercial practice has shifted, the ambit of outsourcing has expanded notably, to the point where, for certain regulated activities, it may encompass any form of arrangement (irrespective of whether there is a pre‑existing internal function) under which a firm engages a service provider to carry out a process, service or activity that the firm would otherwise perform itself. In parallel, the range of services falling within IT outsourcing has broadened as organisations have exploited—and become ever more dependent on— IT to run their businesses and to secure competitive advantage. Conventionally, outsourced IT services might have been those falling within the ‘ IT department’s’ brief. These are frequently categorised in a structured manner as ‘ IT service...

IT outsourcing IT outsourcing refers to handing over information technology functions or services to an external supplier rather than running them internally. It spans numerous transaction models, each bringing its own risks and complexities. Contracts for every form of IT outsourcing need rigorous attention from customers, suppliers and their advisers to secure a fair outcome at signature and as the underlying technology advances throughout the term. When executed well, outsourcing can cut the financial and staffing burden of day-to-day IT operations and infrastructure, freeing resources for higher-value strategic initiatives elsewhere in the business. Entrust a supplier with full responsibility for a range of IT services; Engage several suppliers to manage a complex element of the business; or Retain selected services in-house while outsourcing specific components. Drivers for outsourcing typically include boosting performance, reducing costs, and bringing greater standardisation to IT products and services......

Stop Press: On 31 March 2026, Sir Andrew Mc Farlane, President of the Family Division, released consolidated guidance on allocation and gatekeeping for children proceedings in the Family Court, coming into force on 5 May 2026. It supersedes the 2014 public and private law guidance and establishes a single framework regulating allocation for all children cases. The document confirms the function of gatekeeping teams, maps allocation choices to contemporary procedural routes (including Child Focused Courts), and reiterates, in particular, the core tenets of judicial continuity, proportionality, and the efficient deployment of judicial resources; as referenced, see News Analysis: Consolidated allocation and gatekeeping guidance for children proceedings issued. This Practice Note is in the process of being revised to incorporate the President’s guidance. It provides direction on issuing private children proceedings in the Family Court. It further outlines the approach to allocation and...