Legal Practice Notes

Although every litigation funding agreement ( LFA) and its accompanying papers will differ according to the funder and the nuances of the case being backed, there are core matters that must be tackled during the various stages of negotiation. This Practice Note forms part of a concise series by Tanya Lansky and Tets Ishikawa, Managing Directors of Lion Fish Group Ltd, designed to equip those negotiating or evaluating LFAs and their related documents with a clearer appreciation of the issues in play. Dispute resolution No party ever expects to rely on a dispute resolution clause in a commercial contract. Within the litigation funding sphere, most disagreements about the LFA are ordinarily sorted out between the participants. As a result, it is tempting to default to boilerplate wording submitting ‘to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales’, or whatever the parties...

ARCHIVED: This Horizon scanner, archived as at 14 December 2023, reviews recent and forthcoming developments of interest to Dispute Resolution ( DR) lawyers. It records changes since the 3 October 2023 edition of the Horizon scanner: Dispute Resolution— Horizon scanner— October 2023 [ Archived]. Hot topic—court’s power to order parties to engage in a non-court based dispute resolution process In a seminal ruling, the Court of Appeal in Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2023] EWCA Civ 1416 marked a notable advance in the evolution of dispute resolution across England and Wales. Arising from the council’s stance towards claims alleging a failure to stop Japanese Knotweed migrating from its land into the garden of an adjacent private property, the case revisited the contested question of court-mandated dispute resolution mechanisms. The Court of Appeal clarified that the principles in Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust [2004] EWCA Civ 576 are...

ARCHIVED: This archived Horizon scanner reviews recent and forthcoming developments of interest to Dispute Resolution ( DR) lawyers as at 21 February 2024. It covers changes since the 4 December 2023 edition of the Horizon scanner: Dispute Resolution— Horizon scanner— December 2023 [ Archived]. Hot topic— CPR and PD changes 1 February and 6 April Another round of CPR rules and Practice Direction ( PD) changes comes into force on Saturday, 6 April 2024, while 1 February 2024 saw changes to the Electronic Working Pilot Scheme. The CPR changes are set out in The Civil Procedure ( Amendment) Rules 2024, SI 2024/106. The principal changes concern: case management—there are modifications to Part 26 (the preliminary stage of case management) and Part 28 (fast and intermediate track) that introduce new provisions whilst also clarifying existing rules. There are also amendments to Part 31...

ARCHIVED: This archived Horizon scanner reviews recent and forthcoming developments of note for Dispute Resolution ( DR) practitioners as at 16 August 2023. It summarises updates since the 25 May 2023 issue of the Horizon scanner: Dispute Resolution— Horizon scanner— May 2023 [ Archived]. Hot topic— Litigation funding after PACCAR Michael Bundock, a barrister in the Lexis Nexis Dispute Resolution team, examines the Supreme Court’s decision in R (on the application of PACCAR Inc) v Competition Appeal Tribunal [2023] UKSC 28. The long-awaited judgment of the Supreme Court in PACCAR was delivered on 26 July. In a conclusion that surprised much of the funding market, the court determined that a litigation funding agreement entitling the funder to a return calculated by reference to any damages recovered is a Damages- Based Agreement ( DBA) within section 58AA of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 and the...

Many contracts include provisions on resolving disputes. At times these are simple terms stipulating litigation or possibly arbitration, sometimes also spelling out jurisdiction and the governing law. Yet a clause can instead prescribe other routes of alternative dispute resolution ( ADR) to be pursued should a dispute arise, offering an alternative to litigation or arbitration. Such provisions are often labelled ADR clauses. Parties have a number of options open to them (see below), and it is vital to appreciate the consequences of the drafting choices you make. This Practice Note reviews several clause formulations and evaluates the issues that may arise in relation to each category. The types of dispute resolution clause considered in this Practice Note are: litigation only clauses mediation clauses multi-tier clauses (escalation clauses) hybrid clauses carve-out clauses For guidance on the principal questions around the...

This Horizon scanner reviews recent and forthcoming developments of interest to Dispute Resolution ( DR) lawyers as at 14 June 2024. It reflects updates since the 21 February 2024 edition of the Horizon scanner: Dispute Resolution— Horizon scanner— February 2024 [ Archived]. Hot topic—effect of prorogation of Parliament on Bills affecting dispute resolution Following the calling of a General Election on 22 May 2024, Parliament was prorogued on 24 May 2024. Prorogation generally has the effect of extinguishing pending proceedings on public bills. The interval between the announcement of an election and prorogation is termed the wash-up period. During that interval (in this case, only two days) the government and the opposition agree non-controversial legislation that can be fast-tracked through the remaining Parliamentary stages and granted Royal Assent. Subject to any agreed carry-over, all other public bills then before Parliament fall. For details of the...

Tracker overview This Tracker highlights significant upcoming legislative changes of interest to dispute resolution lawyers, together with ongoing and recently closed consultations and other pertinent updates, enabling practitioners to follow and stay informed on recent and impending developments. To follow developments: for digital assets, including cryptoassets, see Practice Note: Tracker—cryptoassets for Dispute Resolution lawyers for artificial intelligence ( AI), see Practice Note: Tracker— AI for dispute resolution lawyers for alternative dispute resolution ( ADR), see Practice Note: Tracker— ADR developments For earlier developments, see Practice Notes: historic; and Brexit legislation tracker for dispute resolution practitioners [ Archived], which addresses legislative changes linked to the UK’s departure from the EU. Civil procedure Consultation The Online Procedure ( Core Rules and Pilot Schemes) Rules 2026 consultation Key dates: 4 December 2025–10 am on 15 January 2026 Details: Gov.uk opened a...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is no longer maintained and is provided solely for background reference. In addition, some links may not point to the provisions as they were at the time this guidance was published. This year’s annual round-up spotlights notable 2017 developments impacting general dispute resolution practitioners and looks ahead to what may emerge in 2018. Coverage includes: the civil court and the legal profession; substantive law and limitation; pre-action and initial considerations; issuing and progressing a civil claim; and the costs and financing of civil litigation. There are also updates on Lexis+® UK’s content, with news of major enhancements over the past year and what is scheduled for the next twelve months. Reviewing 2017 and previewing 2018 [ Archived] Once more, the year featured numerous changes with consequences for dispute resolution practitioners. As a result, we have separated our ‘annual round-up’ into the...

ARCHIVED This archived Practice Note is no longer maintained and is provided for background only. Moreover, some links may not take you to the provisions as they stood on the date this Practice Note’s guidance was published. This year’s annual round-up reviews notable developments from 2017 and signals what is coming in 2018. It covers: Supreme Court rulings in BPE Solicitors v Hughes- Holland and Tiuta v De Villiers on recovery of loss and the assessment of damages in professional negligence claims; Supreme Court decisions in Globalia v Fulton on mitigation, and Lowick Rose v Swynson concerning unjust enrichment and transferred loss; and From the High Court, an important judgment by Coulson J in Russell v Stone on limitation standstill agreements. Reviewing 2017 Professional negligence—recovering damages and the SAAMCO principle What happened? In BPE Solicitors v Hughes- Holland [2017] UKSC 21, the Supreme Court...

Choosing to include a dispute board within a construction contract’s dispute resolution process is merely the starting point. Once the parties have reached agreement on using a board, attention has to turn to practical matters: who ought to sit on it, the procedure for appointing them, and the way in which the board will carry out its role in practice. This Practice Note addresses the selection and appointment of dispute board members, together with guidance on their operation after appointment. Characteristics of good dispute board members The initial issue for the parties is deciding who should serve on the board. In many agreements, a three-person board is standard, though some also permit a sole-member alternative. The FIDIC forms of contract illustrate this position; they set a three-member board as the default arrangement, yet give both parties the option to choose a...

What is an employee ownership trust An employee ownership trust ( EOT) is a distinct form of employee benefit trust ( EBT) that must satisfy defined statutory conditions. EOTs were brought in by the Finance Act 2014, alongside particular tax advantages made available both to companies owned by an EOT and to individuals who transfer shares to an EOT. Where the strict legal requirements are not met in relation to the EOT, those tax reliefs will not apply. These statutory thresholds and conditions are central to qualification for any associated tax reliefs available under EOTs. For more information on EOTs and the legislative tests they are required to meet, see Practice Note: Employee ownership trusts. For guidance on pitfalls and frequent errors to watch for when establishing and running an EOT, see Practice Note: Pitfalls of setting up and operating an...

Disguised remuneration and share schemes For many years, HMRC has sought to ensure that benefits arising from employment are taxed under income tax with National Insurance contributions ( NICs) operated by employers through the pay as you earn ( PAYE) regime. In contrast, some employers adopted inventive remuneration structures, using employee benefit trusts ( EBTs) and other vehicles to avoid, delay, or reduce income tax exposure. In 2011, anti-avoidance provisions known as the disguised remuneration rules were introduced in Part 7A of the Income Tax ( Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 ( ITEPA 2003). HMRC’s guidance is set out in the Employment Income Manual beginning at EIM45000. The legislation applies where: there is an arrangement that relates to a current, former or prospective employee, or a relevant person connected to the employee. For these purposes, employee includes...

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: Following the Autumn Budget 2024, the government set up an independent examination of the loan charge to review its operation and practical impact. Formally unveiled on 23 January 2025, the review’s remit was to ‘examine the barriers preventing those who are subject to the loan charge but have not already settled and paid their tax liabilities in full from reaching resolution with HMRC’ and to ‘recommend ways in which they can be encouraged to settle with HMRC’ (see News Analysis: Autumn Budget 2024— Independent review of the loan charge). To support this work, a call for evidence directed at individuals still within scope of the loan charge (and their advisers) was issued on 28 March 2025 for public consultation. The Final Report, together with the government’s response, appeared at Budget 2025 on 26 November 2025. In addition, the report concluded that the loan...

FORTHCOMING CHANGE: Following the Autumn Budget 2024 announcement, the government initiated an independent review into the loan charge in question. Formally launched on 23 January 2025, the review’s brief was to examine, in particular, obstacles stopping those still affected by the loan charge, who have yet to settle and pay their tax liabilities in full, from reaching agreement with HMRC, and to recommend how they might be encouraged to reach settlement with HMRC (see News Analysis: Autumn Budget 2024— Independent review of the loan charge). To support this work, a call for evidence aimed at individuals remaining within the scope of the loan charge, and their advisers, was issued on 28 March 2025. The review’s Final Report, together with the government response, was released at Budget 2025 on 26 November 2025......

This protocol covers personal injury matters where harm stems from a disease or illness rather than an accident. If a single incident gives rise to the disease or illness, the parties may, by agreement, use this protocol in place of the Pre- Action Protocol for Personal Injury Claims. For further guidance on the Pre- Action Protocol for Personal Injury Claims, consult the Practice Note: The Pre- Action Protocol for Personal Injury Claims. It also extends to claims that, although valued within the fast track, are rendered unsuitable for that track by their complexity. However, fast track noise-induced hearing loss ( NIHL) cases are governed by Annex E of this protocol—see Noise-induced hearing loss claims below. The timetable set out in this protocol may need to be adjusted by the parties where it is not appropriate to the facts of the case. For...

This Practice Note explores what may amount to discrimination in a social housing setting and the situations in which it may occur. It also outlines the obligations on social housing providers to ensure the needs of people with protected characteristics are met, and to remove or lessen disadvantages they face when accessing housing support services. Social housing providers are treated as public authorities for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 ( Eq A 2010). Consequently, public bodies must publish relevant, proportionate information demonstrating how they will meet the public sector equality duty ( PSED). See Practice Notes: Specific public sector equality duties— England and Specific public sector equality duties— Wales. What is discrimination? Discrimination is the less favourable treatment of an individual or group regarded as ‘protected’ under the Eq A 2010 because they have protected...

For an interest in possession beneficiary, the trust works as a channel through which income flows, keeping its nature and tax treatment for tax purposes. Interest arrives gross; tax is settled by the trustees and appears as net interest for the life tenant in their hands. Likewise, dividends come in gross and the trustees pay the tax, unless the income is mandated directly to the life tenant. This ‘look‑through’ approach acknowledges that the beneficiary is entitled to income as it arises. By contrast, a discretionary beneficiary has no entitlement to the trust’s income until the trustees choose to distribute it. There is no prescribed mechanism to align a payment with income received by the trustees in any period. Therefore, the beneficiary cannot ‘look through’ the trust to the original source of that income. The same applies where the trustees simply hold a power to...

STOP PRESS From 24 February 2025, the principal provisions of the Procurement Act 2023 ( PA 2023) are in force. Any procurement initiated on or after that date must proceed under PA 2023, while procedures commenced under the previous framework—the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 ( PCR 2015), the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016, the Concession Regulations 2016, and the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011—must continue to be conducted and managed under those rules. See Practice Note: Introduction to the Procurement Act 2023— PA 2023. PCR 2015 as assimilated law PCR 2015 are EU-derived domestic legislation and therefore constitute assimilated law under sections 2 and 6 of the European Union ( Withdrawal) Act 2018. For practical guidance on the status and construction of assimilated law, see Practice Note: Assimilated law. Introduction A contracting authority may decide to terminate an award procedure. This Practice Note...

Introduction This Practice Note explains the disclosure obligations for matters assigned to the intermediate track, together with the relevant rules and guidance that apply where the claim form was issued on or after 1 October 2023. It does not purport to address claims governed by the Disclosure Scheme in the Business and Property Courts at all. For general introductory guidance on that scheme, see: Disclosure Scheme ( Business & Property Courts)—overview. For general guidance on disclosure in the other tracks, refer to the following Practice Notes listed below: Disclosure in the small claims track Disclosure in fast track cases Disclosure in multi-track cases The scope of a claim in the intermediate track The intermediate track was introduced from 1 October 2023 for disputes that are more involved than those suitable for the fast track, yet not so complex as to require...

THIS PRACTICE NOTE APPLIES TO PERSONAL PENSION SCHEMES This Practice Note considers the disclosure obligations that applied to trustees of personal pension schemes prior to 6 April 2014 under the Personal Pension Schemes ( Disclosure of Information) Regulations 1987, SI 1987/1110. Those regulations were repealed with effect from 6 April 2014 and therefore no longer apply. In this Practice Note, references to ‘trustees’ should, for a contract-based personal pension, be read as including the managers of the scheme. For guidance on the disclosure rules that applied to occupational pension schemes before 6 April 2014 under the Occupational Pension Schemes ( Disclosure of Information) Regulations 1996, SI 1996/1655, see Practice Note: Occupational pension schemes—disclosure requirements before 6 April 2014. From 6 April 2014, the disclosure regime for occupational and personal pension schemes was consolidated and harmonised into a single set of...