Coronavirus (COVID-19): Existing financings/utilised debt Does debt documentation in your jurisdiction typically foresee termination rights for the lender upon the occurrence of a crisis? If so, are eg customary material adverse effect (MAC) provisions enforceable in such instance? Yes, besides LMA standard debt documentation, Czech banks commonly include MAC related termination provisions either directly in their loan agreements or in their general terms and conditions (GTCs) that entitle the lender to one-sided termination, cancellation of commitments or change in fees and/or interest rates together with compensation for any new costs. Such MAC provisions generally include, among others, the inability to fulfil debtor´s obligations under the debt documentation, deterioration of debtor´s financial position or the value of provided collateral or the inability of the lender to enforce its rights and claims arising out of the debt documentation. The termination cannot be unjustified and as the current epidemic does not automatically constitute an event considered to have a material adverse effect, lenders should proceed cautiously and seek legal advice while formulating the reasons for MAC induced termination. This

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 1 September 2023; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline An appeal by Cérélia Group Holding SAS and Cérélia UK Limited against the CMA’s decision of 20 January 2023 concerning the final report on its phase 2 investigation into the completed acquisition by Cérélia Group Holing SAS of certain assets relating to the UK and Ireland dough business Jus-Ro of General Mills, Inc. Latest development On 1 September 2023, the CAT issued its judgment in which it unanimously dismissed the appeal. It held that: (i) the CMA's analysis and conclusions in relation to the SLC were reasonable. and did not contain any errors of fact or law. The CMA found that there was nothing irrational about the process by which the CMA investigated the merger; (ii) the CMA’s decision on the appropriate remedy was not made without reasonable foundation or irrational; (iii) there was no procedural unfairness arsing

CASE HUB NOTE—appeal lodged before the CAT in Cérélia Group Holding SAS and Cérélia UK Limited v CMA (1579/4/12/23) ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 20 January 2023; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline UK merger investigation into the completed acquisition by Cérélia Group Holing SAS of certain assets relating to the UK and Ireland dough business Jus-Ro of General Mills, Inc. The transaction involves horizontal overlap in the wholesale supply of dough-to-bake products to grocery retailers in the UK. Latest developments On 20 January 2023, the CMA issued its final report, finding that the transaction may be expected to result in an SLC in market for the wholesale supply of dough-to-bake products to grocery retailers in the UK As a result, the CMA has decided that only an asset divestment involving the entire Jus-Rol business, akin to an unwinding of the merger, to a suitable purchaser would be an effective remedy to address the SLC that the CMA has identified. Parties • Cérélia

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 11 April 2024; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline Appeal against the CAT’s judgment in which it dismissed the appeal against the CMA’s decision of 20 January 2023 concerning the CMA’s final report on its phase 2 investigation into the completed acquisition by Cérélia Group Holing SAS of certain assets relating to the UK and Ireland dough business Jus-Ro of General Mills, Inc. Latest development On 11 April 2024, the Court of Appeal delivered its judgment in which it unanimously dismissed the appeal. In particular, the Court of Appeal held (amongst other things) that the: (i) CMA’s approach was logical and rational, and there had been sufficient material before the CMA for it to find as it did; (ii) CMA consultation of the parties through the provision of its provisional findings had been fair; (iii) CAT had correctly found that the CMA has special reasons for needing

1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Ivorian merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Côte d'Ivoire? The Ivorian national competition legislation was last amended in 2019 by Ordinance no. 2019-389 dated 8 May 2019 which amended Ordinance no. 2013-662 dated 20 September 2013 (Competition Act). The National Competition Commission (NCC) is the body that is tasked with enforcement of the Competition Act. However, the Competition Act does not regulate mergers. The Ivory Coast is a member of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (Union Economique et Monétaire Ouest Africaine) (WAEMU) and is subject to the competition rules and regulations of WAEMU, found in Directive 02/2002/CM/UEMOA (WAEMU Regulations). WAEMU has exclusive jurisdiction over merger control within its member states, the powers of the NCC are mostly meant to assist the WAEMU Commission in this regard. There are no planned updates/changes to the WAEMU Regulations at this time, nor are there any ‘hot’ merger control issues. 2. Under Ivorian merger control

This Q&A references the following Precedent:  Oath for probate (general form): Tristram and Coote's Probate Precedents [60]. Assuming

It is assumed that: • the deed of variation complied with section 142 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984) and section 62(6) of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (TCGA 1992) • the daughters remain as beneficiaries of the discretionary trust For general information on variations on intestacy, see Practice Notes: Variation of Will or intestacy after death and Variation of Will or intestacy after death—Q&As. For both income tax and capital gains tax (CGT) purposes, the individual who was originally entitled to the property

Dun and Bradstreet.

Director’s & Officer’s insurance.

Heavy Water (deuterium oxide)

Design Authority: The entity that has overall responsibility for the reactor design process, approves design changes and is responsible for ensuring that the requisite knowledge is maintained is referred to as the design authority. The NPP operating company is frequently the only organisation that has an overview of the plant design as a whole and of the impact of operation on the design. It is normally expected to take on the role of design authority.

Design Acceptance Confirmation/Certificate: Written confirmation issued by ONR that a nuclear reactor design has passed a Generic Design Assessment (GDA). ONR may issue an Interim Design Acceptance Confirmation (iDAC) identifying issues to be resolved by the requesting party before issuing a DAC.