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
The Practice Note offers practical direction on the evidence to be used in countervailing investigations. It outlines the procedural steps an investigating authority must follow when requesting material, the entitlement of interested parties to submit evidence, and their right to protect their interests by providing it. It also covers the duty to treat claimed confidential information as such, the requirement to verify information supplied, and the situations in which investigating authorities may rely on other facts to reach a determination. Initiation of investigation Before any countervailing measures are imposed, the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures ( SCM Agreement) requires Member States to undertake an investigation. That investigation begins once a complaint or application has been received. For practical guidance on a domestic industry’s application, its standing to apply, the initiation process, notification duties and termination requirements, see Practice Note: An...
All references to Articles in this Practice Note are to the Articles of the Arbitration Rules of the Dubai International Arbitration Centre ( DIAC and the DIAC Rules). Under the DIAC Rules, the tribunal is empowered to set the evidentiary framework, including decisions on admissibility, relevance, and the weight of any material presented ( Article 25.2). Seat and place of hearings Initial seat In the absence of any contrary party agreement, the seat of the arbitration is initially the DIFC (the 2017 Rules had Dubai as the default). That said, tribunals may finally determine the seat after considering any party observations and all other relevant circumstances ( Article 20.1). Hearings The DIAC Rules 2022 expressly accommodate virtual hearings. Tribunals may decide that a hearing be held in person, by telephone, or through any other appropriate form of virtual communication, including...
This Practice Note considers the use of the International Bar Association ( IBA) Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (the IBA Rules) in international arbitration. The IBA Rules are frequently incorporated, whether entirely or selectively, in international arbitration (both commercial and investment) to organise factual and expert proof, especially where participants hail from diverse legal traditions, often common law and civil law systems. Within the IBA Rules lies a blend of provisions: some sit nearer to common law practice (eg on witness evidence) whilst others are closer to civil law approaches (eg on document production requests). Elsewhere, provisions strike a balance between these two approaches. The IBA issues detailed commentary to accompany the Rules, offering practitioners helpful further guidance, and this explanatory material is also relied upon and cited within this Practice Note. The latest iteration of the IBA Rules was...
ARCHIVED : This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained . CORONAVIRUS ( COVID-19): Many arbitral organisations have addressed the coronavirus pandemic by issuing practical guidance and/or modifying their usual procedures and ways of working. For details on how this material and related arbitration proceedings might be affected, see Practice Note: Arbitral organisations and coronavirus ( COVID-19)—practical impact [ Archived] [ Archived]. For further information, see: Coronavirus ( COVID-19) and arbitration—overview. This Practice Note examines the provisions relating to evidence in arbitration proceedings conducted under the 2017 International Chamber of Commerce ( ICC) Rules of Arbitration (2017 ICC Rules). It also refers to guidance in the ICC Note to Parties and Arbitral Tribunals on the Conduct of the Arbitration under the ICC Rules of Arbitration ( ICC Note). Unless otherwise indicated, references in this Practice Note to articles of and...
ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note summarises the EU- US Privacy Shield arrangements as they existed before 16 July 2020, when the Court of Justice found the mechanism invalid. It is supplied for background only and is no longer maintained. For guidance on the consequences of that invalidation, see Practice Notes: UK GDPR and EU GDPR—transfers of personal data internationally and to international organisations, and The Privacy Shield—timeline [ Archived]. Brexit: On 31 January 2020, the UK ceased to be an EU Member State and entered an implementation period, during which EU law continued to apply. During this time, the GDPR applies in the UK and the UK is generally treated as an EU (and EEA) state for EEA and UK data protection law purposes. Therefore, any references to EEA or EU states in this Practice Note should be interpreted as also including the UK until the end of that...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED —this archived hub records the position as at the judgment dated 4 December 2013; it is no longer updated. For more detail, see the timeline, commentary and related/relevant cases. Note–the case was remitted to the CC/ CMA–see Eurotunnel/ Sea France (remittal investigation). Case facts Outline Initial appeals by Eurotunnel and Société Coopérative de Production Sea France against the Competition Commission’s ruling preventing Eurotunnel’s completed purchase of Sea France assets. Parties Groupe Eurotunnel, the Channel Tunnel operator that acquired three Sea France ferries and other assets and now runs them between Dover and Calais under the My Ferry Link brand Société Coopérative de Production Sea France ( SCOP). SCOP is the workers’ co-operative of former Sea France staff who crew the My Ferry Link ferries for Eurotunnel and act as sales and marketing agent, whilst Eurotunnel bears the commercial...
The EU’s unique institutional framework As a supranational polity, the EU is neither a country nor a federation like the United States, nor an organisation for co-operation between governments such as the United Nations. It is, in truth, one of a kind. Its arrangement fits no standard legal classification and its achievements stem from the distinctive way it operates. The EU’s Member States remain sovereign and independent, yet they pool elements of their sovereignty to secure strength and global influence they could not attain individually. For details, see Practice Note: List of EU Member States and official languages. The EU’s institutional system is designed to uphold its values, objectives and interests, along with those of its citizens and its Member States. It also promotes the coherence, effectiveness and continuity of EU policies and actions. The core framework comprises seven institutions...
This Practice Note reviews Regulation ( EC) 1896/2006—the European Order for Payment Regulation ( EOP Regulation)—as updated by Regulation ( EU) 2015/2421. It outlines European Orders for Payment ( EOPs), also known as European Payment Orders ( EPOs). These serve cross-border matters to secure payment of a defined, uncontested monetary claim without issuing court proceedings. Article 2 of the EOP Regulation lists claims that are excluded. A defendant may file a ‘statement in opposition’, request a review of the order in exceptional cases when out of time to do so, or ask the enforcing court to decline enforcement. This Practice Note also refers to the Report of 17 October 2016 reviewing the Regulation. Relevant regulations and report Regulation ( EC) 1896/2006 creating a ( EOP Regulation) Commission Regulation ( EU) 936/2012 amending the Annexes to the EOP...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub records the position as at the decision date of 10 February 2016; it is no longer being maintained at all. See the timeline and commentary for further details. Case facts Outline of the European Commission’s merger inquiry into Staples’ acquisition of Office Depot ( Case M.7555). The deal features a horizontal overlap across markets for office supplies distribution. Latest developments On 10 February 2016, the Commission approved the transaction, subject to commitments. Under these remedies, Staples will dispose of: the entirety of Office Depot’s contract distribution business in the EEA and Switzerland, addressing competition concerns in both international contract sales and in national contract sales in Sweden and the Netherlands; and Office Depot’s whole business operations in Sweden, also addressing concerns in the Swedish wholesale market for the supply of office products within Sweden. Staples may only complete the deal once the...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case sets out the position as at the decision date of 25 May 2025; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Summary of the European Commission’s merger review of Viasat Inc.’s proposed acquisition of Inmarsat Group Holdings Limited ( M.10807). The deal features horizontal overlaps in the provision of in‑flight connectivity for aircraft. Latest developments On 25 May 2023, the Commission granted unconditional clearance for the transaction. Parties Viasat Inc.: Headquartered in the US, Viasat is a vertically integrated satellite network operator and satellite services provider. It owns and runs four GEO satellites and also leases capacity on third‑party satellites. Its three core segments are satellite services, commercial networks, and government systems. Inmarsat Group Holdings Limited: Based in the UK, Inmarsat is a vertically integrated satellite network operator and satellite services provider. It operates three proprietary satellite networks across a fleet of fifteen GEO...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED –this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 2 September 2013; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline, commentary and related cases. Case facts Outline the European Commission’s merger investigation into the proposed acquisition by Nynas of Shell’s Harburg refinery assets ( Case M.6360). Latest developments On 2 September 2013, the Commission granted unconditional clearance, relying on the failing firm defence. The clearance was granted without conditions. The transaction was notified to the Commission on 19 February 2013 and was sent to a phase II investigation on 26 March 2013. Parties Nynas – manufactures and markets naphthenic base oils for industrial lubricants, process oils and TFO; it is jointly owned and controlled by Petróleos de Venezuela SA ( Venezuela) and Neste Oil Oyj ( Finland). Shell – the ultimate parent is Royal Dutch Shell plc; a fully...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED – this preserved case hub captures the position as at the decision date of 4 September 2012; it is not updated. See also the timeline and related cases. Case facts Outline of European Commission’s merger probe into a joint venture by Telefonica UK, Vodafone UK and Everything Everywhere ( Case M.6314). Unconditional clearance followed on 4 September 2012. Parties Telefonica UK, Vodafone UK and Everything Everywhere are the UK’s three biggest mobile network operators ( MNOs). Telefonica UK operates the O2 mobile network domestically and provides fixed-line phone and broadband services. It is a subsidiary of the Spanish Telefonica group, which supplies fixed and mobile telephony across the EU and Latin America. Vodafone UK is a UK-based MNO and also supplies fixed telephone and broadband offerings in the UK as well......
CASE HUB NOTE—appeal lodged before the General Court in Case T- 251/19 ARCHIVED This archived hub captures the position as at the decision of 06/02/2019 and is no longer maintained. For more detail, see the timeline and commentary. Case facts Summary of the European Commission’s merger investigation into Wieland’s purchase of Aurubis Rolled Products and Schwermetall ( Case M.8900). The deal presented horizontal overlaps in rolled copper product markets—notably for particular copper alloys and certain end uses—and vertical links concerning supplies of pre-rolled strip and billets. Latest developments On 6 February 2019, the Commission prohibited the merger. It found the transaction would have rendered Wieland a dominant force in EEA markets for rolled copper products. Commitments offered by the parties did not sufficiently resolve the Commission’s concerns. Parties Wieland Werke AG ( Wieland), based in Germany, manufactures and supplies semi-finished copper and copper alloy products, covering the chain from casting forms to...
CASE HUB NOTE—appeal lodged before the General Court in Case T- 584/19 ARCHIVED—this case hub reflects the position as at the decision of 11/06/2019 and is no longer maintained. See the timeline. Case facts Outline European Commission merger review of the planned joint venture between Tata Steel and Thyssen Krupp ( Case M.8713). The deal featured horizontal overlaps across several flat steel product markets. Latest developments On 11 June 2019, the Commission blocked the transaction. It found the deal would have weakened competition and driven up prices for multiple steel categories. The package of commitments proposed by the parties did not sufficiently resolve the Commission’s concerns. Parties Tata Steel Limited is an India-headquartered multinational steel producer and part of the Tata Group. In Europe, it is the second-largest steelmaker, operating steelmaking in the Netherlands and the UK, with manufacturing sites across Europe. Thyssen Krupp AG is a...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED —this archived case hub sets out the position as at the decision date of 06/02/2019; it is no longer updated or maintained. See further, the timeline and timeline, and accompanying commentary. Case facts Outline European Commission merger review of the intended combination of the mobility businesses of Siemens AG and Alstom S. A. ( Case M.8677). The deal featured horizontal overlaps across markets for rolling stock (notably high-speed, mainline and urban trains) and signalling solutions. Latest developments On 6 February 2019, the Commission blocked the deal. It found the merger would have produced an unchallenged leader in certain signalling segments and a dominant force in high-speed trains. Remedies tabled by the parties did not sufficiently resolve the Commission’s concerns. Parties Siemens AG ( Siemens), headquartered in Germany, operates globally across multiple industrial sectors. Its mobility division supplies a wide portfolio of rolling stock, rail...
Case hub archived — this archived case hub captures the position as at the decision date of 18 March 2021; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts European Commission merger review of the planned acquisition by Danfoss A/ S of Eaton Corporation plc’s Hydraulics business ( M.9820). The deal entails horizontal overlaps in the supply of hydraulic components. Latest developments On 18 March 2021, the Commission conditionally approved the transaction. To remedy its competition concerns, it accepted commitments from Danfoss, including, among other measures, the divestment of parts of Danfoss’ HSU, ESV and orbital motors businesses. Parties Danfoss A/ S ( Danfoss): Based in Denmark, Danfoss is a global corporation chiefly engaged in producing components and engineering technologies for refrigeration, air conditioning, heating, motor control and hydraulics used in off-road machinery. It also delivers solutions for renewable energy, such as solar and wind power, and...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub reflects the position as at the decision of 4 May 2020 and is no longer maintained. For further details, see the timeline and commentary. Case facts Outline European Commission merger investigation into Aurubis AG’s proposed acquisition of Metallo Group Holding NV ( Case M.9409). The deal features horizontal overlaps in the markets for copper and copper scrap destined for refining. Latest developments On 4 May 2020, the Commission cleared the transaction without conditions. Parties Aurubis AG ( Aurubis) Germany-based Aurubis is a global supplier of non-ferrous metals and Europe’s largest integrated copper producer. It treats copper concentrates and scrap to make copper cathodes and refining by-products. It also supplies copper shapes and semi-finished copper, plus copper alloy goods including flat-rolled material, bars, rods and wires. Metallo Group Holding NV ( Metallo) Belgium-based Metallo works in the recycling, processing and trading of non-ferrous metals. It refines copper scrap to...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub captures the position as at the decision date of 7 May 2018; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline: European Commission merger investigation concerning Arcelor Mittal’s proposed acquisition of Ilva ( Case M.8444). The transaction features horizontal overlaps across markets for flat carbon steel. Latest development On 7 May 2018, the Commission conditionally approved the transaction, subject to commitments. In terms of those commitments, it accepted a remedies package requiring divestment of: production assets in Belgium, the Czech Republic, Luxembourg, Italy, Romania and Macedonia, and distribution assets in France and Italy. Parties Arcelor Mittal S. A., a Luxembourg‑based multinational steel producer, is listed on the stock exchanges of Amsterdam, Barcelona, Bilbao, Luxembourg, Madrid, New York, Paris and Valencia. It is the world’s leading steel and mining company, active in 60 countries and operating industrial...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED –this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 10 September 2014; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline of the European Commission phase II merger investigation into Huntsman Corporation’s planned acquisition of selected businesses from Rockwood Holdings ( Case M.7061). The operation gives rise to a horizontal overlap in the supply of sulphate-based Ti O 2 pigments, in particular titanium dioxide, especially grades for printing uses. Latest developments On 10 September 2014, the Commission cleared the transaction subject to commitments. The accepted remedy is Huntsman’s divestment of its TR52 business, its principal Ti O 2 grade used for printing ink applications (for example inks employed in flexible packaging). The divestment package comprises: the TR52 brand; associated technology and know-how; customer arrangements; and certain key...
CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archive records the position as at the decision of 24 May 2013 and the conclusion of enforcement action on 29 October 2014; it is not updated. For more, see the timeline and commentary. Case facts Summary of the European Commission’s merger probe into the proposed combination of Munksjo with part of Ahlstrom’s operations to create ‘ New Co’ ( Case M.6576). The Commission cleared the deal subject to commitments on 24/05/2013. Subsequent enforcement proceedings concerning the alleged supply of misleading information were initiated by the Commission but discontinued on 29/10/2014. Latest developments The Commission approved the merger with conditions on 24 May 2013. The accepted remedy is the sale of Ahlstrom’s abrasive paper backings and PRIP unit based in Osnabrück, Germany. Ahlstrom will keep one paper machine at the site, which is not used to make either abrasive paper backings or PRIP. Certain on-site...
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
