This flowchart illustrates the process for the use of a conflict avoidance panel and possible outcomes. The Conflict Avoidance Process, often referred to as CAP, provides a structured early intervention process under which independent subject-matter experts can consider an emerging

The table below shows a range of different conflict and confidentiality situations we may encounter. It can be used to help decide whether we can act and, if so, what measures we need to put in place. It reflects the requirements in the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs and RFLs (Code for Solicitors) and the SRA Code of Conduct for Firms (Code for Firms) relating to conflicts of interest and protecting confidential information belonging to current or former clients. It does not address conflicts with the commercial interests of the firm or confidentiality obligations to non-clients, eg under a confidentiality agreement with a third party. When we assess a potential conflict or confidentiality issue, at one end of the scale we simply cannot act and at the other end there are no confidentiality or conflict problems and no information safeguards to put in place—in between, whether we can act depends on factors like SRA exceptions, client consent and information

This Practice Note examines conflict avoidance in construction and engineering projects. It explains what conflict avoidance means, how the concept has developed in the construction industry, and the role of current industry initiatives including the Conflict Avoidance Coalition, the Conflict Avoidance Pledge and the Conflict Avoidance Process/Panel. It also considers how parties can reduce the risk of conflict through procurement strategy, early collaboration, clear risk allocation and careful contract drafting. The Note reviews commonly used contractual mechanisms, including early warning procedures, tiered dispute resolution clauses, dispute boards operating in an advisory capacity and conflict avoidance panels, and considers the approach taken in NEC, JCT and FIDIC standard forms. It concludes with practical guidance for construction lawyers advising clients on embedding conflict avoidance into contract strategy and project delivery. What is conflict avoidance? Conflict avoidance in construction projects is the deliberate and proactive use of contractual, procedural and behavioural mechanisms to prevent disagreements from escalating into formal disputes. It does not assume that disagreements can be eliminated. Differences of view are common on construction projects,

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note tracks news and analysis published across Lexis+® UK since 24 February 2022 relating to the conflict in Ukraine. For content on financial sanctions, see the Financial sanctions toolkit which brings together resources from across Lexis+® UK providing insight and practical guidance on UK and international regimes for financial sanctions. col style="width: 33%;"> Date News Brief description of News Analysis 22 December 2022 Ukraine conflict—OFSI issues General Licenses INT/2022/2469656, INT/2022/2470256, INT/2022/2470056 and INT/2022/2470156—LNB News 22/12/2022 41 HM Treasury’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) has issued General Licenses INT/2022/2469656, INT/2022/2470256, INT/2022/2470056 and INT/2022/2470156 under Regulation 64 of the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/855. The General Licenses implement the Oil Price Cap, which deprives Russia of access to excess oil revenues by constraining its ability to sell at global market prices and enables Russian oil to flow to the third countries that require it. The Licenses came into force on 5 December 2022. 21 December 2022 Ukraine conflict—FCDO updates Russian sanctions guidance—LNB News 21/12/2022 87 The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note tracked news and analysis published across Lexis+® UK in 2023 related to the conflict in Ukraine. To keep up to date with news and news analysis on sanctions relating to Russia and the conflict in Ukraine in 2024 and beyond, sign up for our news alerts and weekly highlights. For details on developments in 2022, see Practice Note: Conflict in Ukraine news & analysis—tracker. For content on financial sanctions, see the Financial sanctions toolkit which brings together resources from across Lexis+® UK Practical Guidance providing insight and practical guidance on UK and international regimes for financial sanctions. Date News Brief description of News Analysis 20 December 2023 OFSI amends General Licence—Oil Price Cap INT/2022/2469656—LNB News 20/12/2023 57 The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) has amended General Licence—Oil Price Cap INT/2022/2469656, which was originally created on 4 December 2022 and previously amended on 20 December 2023. The General Licence is granted under Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations

Conflict of interest describes a situation where a lawyer, fiduciary, director, trustee or public decision‑maker’s duty to a client or principal is, or may reasonably appear to be, compromised by their own interests or by duties owed to another. It covers actual, potential and apparent conflicts.In legal services, conflicts are governed by professional conduct rules rather than a single statute. The SRA Codes (England and Wales), Law Society of Scotland Practice Rules, Bar Standards Board rules, and the Law Societies of Northern Ireland and Ireland prohibit acting in a client conflict or an own‑interest conflict, subject to narrow exceptions (typically informed consent and effective information barriers). Practitioners must identify conflicts early, manage confidentiality and disclosure duties, obtain consent where permitted, and decline or cease to act if risks cannot be mitigated.In corporate and charity law, fiduciary duties and Companies Act 2006 ss 175–177 (UK) and Companies Act 2014 (Ireland) require directors to avoid conflicts and declare interests; charity trustees are subject to comparable duties.In public law and procurement, conflict rules address bias: the test for apparent bias (Porter v Magill) and ethics regimes require disclosure and recusal. Principles are broadly consistent across the UK and Ireland.

The term is used to describe the issue of which country's law and jurisdiction applies to a contract.

Arbitration analysis: The English Commercial Court granted a final anti-suit injunction in favour of Shell Petroleum (‘Shell’) against Sunlink Energies and Resources Ltd (‘Sunlink’), in relation to Nigerian court proceedings brought by Sunlink in breach of an arbitration clause in favour of London seated arbitration under the auspices of the International Chamber of Commerce (‘ICC’) (the ‘Arbitration Clause’). To determine the governing law of the Arbitration Clause, Mr Justice Baker followed the Supreme Court’s decision in Enka v Chubb. Although the arbitration is seated in London, the governing law of the underlying agreement is Nigerian law, and therefore the governing law of the Arbitration Clause is Nigerian law. Sunlink argued that the Nigerian court was the correct forum on the basis that the Arbitration Clause was invalid as it referred to non-extant rules, was incapable of performance and was contrary to Nigerian public policy. Each of the grounds was dismissed by the judge. The injunction included mandatory requirements on Sunlink to take steps to withdraw the Nigerian proceedings. Written by Andrew Rigden Green, head of International Arbitration, Greater China, partner at Stephenson Harwood, Hong Kong.

The High Court has held that the widow of a British Army officer who was killed in a road traffic accident in Germany, is unable to rely on the Fatal Accident Act 1976 and instead must bring her claim for damages via the applicable German law. Her dependency claim will be substantially less when assessed under German law as principals of mitigation will apply (Cox v Ergo Versicherung)

Dispute Resolution analysis: This case is important for parties and their lawyers confronted with agreements that contain conflicting arbitration and jurisdiction clauses. A coverage dispute arose between the claimant and the defendant reinsurer. Two sets of policy documents had been entered into. The first contained an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the English courts and an English governing law clause. The second contained an arbitration clause providing for arbitration in New York and for the law of New York to apply. The claimant sought anti-suit relief to prevent an arbitration in New York. The defendant sought a determination that the English court had no jurisdiction to try the claimant’s claim, and a stay of the court proceedings. The court held that, as a matter of contractual construction and in particular the construction of a ‘confusion’ clause, precedence was to be given to the English jurisdiction clause rather than to the New York arbitration clause. The claimant’s application for final anti-suit relief was therefore granted, and the defendant’s application for a stay was refused. Written by Camilla Macpherson.

This Practice Note explains how the courts will approach cases where the welfare of two children who have conflicting interests is inextricably linked This includes cases concerning child-parents and siblings. It also provides guidance on cases where the parents and child’s interests conflict. The welfare of more than one child When any court determines any question with respect to: • the upbringing of the child, or • the administration of the child's property or the application of any income arising from it the child's welfare shall be the court's paramount consideration unless expressly or impliedly excluded by statute. In situations where the welfare of two children who have conflicting interests is inextricably linked, the court must decide whether the welfare principle applies in favour of one or other of the children or neither of them. This question may arise where the application for an order is made by a child or involving siblings. Child-parents Cases arise where the applicant for contact with a child is themself a child. The court is faced with determining whose welfare

This conflicts and confidentiality decision tree works through the conflicts and confidentiality requirements in the SRA Standards and Regulations to help you reach a decision on whether we can act in a particular matter and understand what steps you need to follow in order to accept instructions. It covers the SRA’s regulatory requirements regarding confidential information belonging to current or former clients. It does not address confidentiality obligations to non-clients, eg under a confidentiality agreement with a third party. For more information about conflicts of interest and confidentiality, please refer to our Conflicts, confidentiality and disclosure policy. Click below to view or print the full-size PDF version: Note 1—prohibition on acting in an own interest conflict situation An own interest conflict arises where there is a conflict (or a significant risk of a conflict) between: • the personal or commercial interests of the firm or a member of our staff; and • our duty to act in the best interests of any client in relation to their matter or a related matter. We can never act if there is