The Association of Taxation Technicians (ATT) has submitted a response to the policy paper and draft legislation on abolishing the Furnished Holiday Lettings (FHLs) regime from 6 April 2025.

Atomic Weapons Establishment: UK nuclear defence sites in Berkshire (Aldermaston and Burghfield).

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 13 March 2015; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline, commentary and related cases Case facts Outline Appeal by AXA PPP Healthcare Limited against the CMA’s final decision in the private healthcare market investigation (CAT case number 1228/6/12/14). Parties AXA PPP Healthcare Limited (AXA). AXA is one of the largest providers of private medical insurance (PMI) in the UK. Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) Market(s) Privately funded healthcare services in the UK, including both independent private hospitals and private patient units in NHS hospitals.AXA is a provider of PMI in the UK and contracts with private hospital groups for the provision of medical services—the three largest private hospital groups were the principal parties in the CMA's private healthcare market investigation. Decision being appealed CMA's final decision and report in the private healthcare market investigation (published on 2 April 2014). In particular, AXA is challenging two aspects of the report: • private hospitals in central London, and the decision

Law360: AXA XL and other reinsurers have hit back at allegations that they are liable for claims totalling almost US$190m over planes said to be stranded in Russia after the invasion of Ukraine, arguing that the aircraft are not completely lost.

Law360, London: SMBC Aviation Capital Ltd has reached a settlement with AXA XL Insurance Co UK Ltd in its US$334m claim against several major insurers over payouts for planes stranded in Russia following the invasion of Ukraine, the latest development in wide-ranging multibillion-dollar litigation.

Law360: Consultancy AXA Climate has officially rolled out a platform to help industrial companies with strengthening their sustainability reporting requirements and measuring the effects of climate-related risks on their sites, expanding its climate offering to a wider range of organisations.

Law360: AXA told the Court of Appeal on 15 October 2024 that a limitation ruling in a test case against HMRC over taxes collected under a violation of EU law had a 'binding effect' on follower claims in a group litigation order.

Law360, London: AXA has won a £675m battle with Santander to recover payouts for wrongly sold payment protection insurance as a London court ruled that the Spanish banking institution was liable for 'systemic failings' in historical sales of the policy.

Environmental law is heavily influenced by the three ‘pillars’ under the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) ‘Convention’ on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters done at Aarhus, Denmark on 25 June 1998 (the Aarhus Convention). The Aarhus Convention The Aarhus Convention, officially known as ‘the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters’, was adopted under the auspices of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) in 1998. The UK ratified the Aarhus Convention in 2005 and is currently one of the Convention’s 48 Parties. As a Party to the Aarhus Convention, the UK is committed to guaranteeing the rights of access to information, public participation in decision-making, and access to justice in environmental matters in accordance with the provisions of this Convention The Aarhus Convention comprises three pillars: • access to environmental information • participation in the environmental decision-making process, and • access to justice in environmental matters The third pillar, access to justice, requires parties to

Environment analysis: This case concerns the scope of the Aarhus Convention’s access to justice provisions in the context of a judicial review challenge to UK government decisions implementing the UK-Australia Free Trade Agreement (FTA). Specifically, the Court of Appeal was asked to determine whether a claim brought by Global Feedback Ltd (GFL), a charity focused on environmental protection, was an ‘Aarhus Convention claim’ for the purposes of the Civil Procedure Rules and thus entitled to special costs protection. GFL challenged the government’s decision to make regulations giving effect to tariff preferences for Australian imports, arguing that the decision would increase greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (‘carbon leakage’) and that the government had failed to properly assess this risk, contrary to its obligations under domestic and international law. The key legal issue was whether the relevant statutory provisions (primarily within the Taxation (Cross-Border Trade) Act 2018 and associated regulations, and in particular section 28) were ‘provisions of national law relating to the environment’ within the meaning of Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Convention. Written by Joel Semakula, barrister at Landmark Chambers.

The Aarhus Convention—introduction The EU ratified the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention) in February 2005. The EU, together with the 27 Member States, became Parties to the Convention in May 2005. The Aarhus Convention provides that each Party to it must guarantee the public three key rights: • access to environmental information, including information on the state of the environment, policies or measures affecting the environment, and public health and safety where these are affected by the state of the environment • participation in the environmental decision-making process, and • access to justice in environmental matters Non-compliance with the Aarhus Convention Article 15 of the Aarhus Convention requires the Parties to set up arrangements of a non-confrontational, non-judicial and consultative nature to review Parties’ compliance with the Convention. Such arrangements are required to allow for public involvement and may include the option of considering communications from members of the public

From a person dying intestate; description of property acquired according to the rules of intestate succession.