Self regulation, codes of practice and guidance

DHSC publishes response and lays finalised brand advertising exemption regulations before Parliament

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has published the government’s response to the consultation on the Advertising (Less Healthy Food and Drink) (Brand Advertising Exemption) Regulations 2025, SI 2025/1011, and laid the regulations and explanatory memorandum before Parliament. The regulations provide an exemption for brand advertising from restrictions on less healthy food and drink advertising on television and online. They are intended to reduce children’s exposure to less healthy products under the government’s policy on tackling childhood obesity. The regulations will apply across the UK from 5 January 2026, with voluntary compliance encouraged from 1 October 2025. Ofcom and the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) will oversee enforcement, and ASA will issue implementation guidance before commencement.

Commercial weekly highlights—11 September 2025

This week's edition of Commercial weekly highlights includes: analysis of the High Court decision in Peter Dunn v Kostas Kazolides which addresses questions about limitation periods, insolvency, formal requirements for the execution of deeds, and how variation to the contract between the principal debtor and creditor may discharge a guarantor, news that the Competition and Markets Authority has published new guidance for businesses that host online reviews, outlining how to comply with consumer protection law, and news that the European Commission has imposed a fine of €2.95bn on Google for breaching Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.

Google, Shein face record-setting €475m in fines for French cookie-rule violations

MLex: Google was fined a record €325m for violating French rules on managing cookies and personalised advertising in e-mail service Gmail, the French data protection authority said today. The authority also levied a €150m penalty against Infinite Styles Services Co Ltd, the Irish subsidiary of Singapore-based online retailer Shein, for failing to get users’ consent for tracking cookies on its shein.com website.

Anti-suit injunctions and exclusion of liability (JP Morgan v Werealize)

Commercial analysis: The Commercial Court granted anti-suit injunction (ASI) relief to directors of Viva, a Greek fintech company, restraining JP Morgan (JPM) from pursuing tort claims against them in Greece, as such proceedings breached an implied obligation in a shareholders’ agreement (SHA) not to bring proceedings in jurisdictions where exclusion of liability provisions would not be effective. The court found that clause 33 of the SHA, which provided that ‘no party (nor any of its Representatives) shall owe any duty of care or have any liability in tort or otherwise to any other party (or its respective Representatives)’, contained an implied promise not to sue in jurisdictions that would not give effect to such provisions. The court rejected alternative ASI relief claims based on quasi-contractual arguments and vexatious conduct. This decision demonstrates how contractual immunity clauses can be enforced through ASI even against non-signatory third parties, providing important guidance for commercial drafters on extraterritorial enforcement of liability exclusions. Written by Parham Kouchikali (partner) and Natalia Faekova (Senior Associate) at Taylor Wessing LLP.