ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note considers the requirement for a harmful event to enable a court to have special jurisdiction under Article 7(2) of Regulation 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). It then considers what is a harmful event when considering specific types of claims: economic loss, damaged or defective goods, personal injury claims, intellectual property claims, actions for inducing breach of contract as well as other types of claims. For guidance on the general principles that apply when dealing with tort and delict claims under the regulation, see Practice Note: E&W Brussels I (recast)—tort and delict claims (art 7(2)) [Archived]. For guidance when dealing with contract claims under the regulation, see Practice Note: E&W Brussels I (recast)—contract claims (art 7(1)) [Archived]. Impact of UK’s departure from the EU Following exit day (ie 31 January 2020), the UK became a third state in respect of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). As a result of transitional

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note considers exceptions to the general rule that a claimant must bring proceedings in the jurisdiction of the defendant’s domicile under Article 8 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). It covers third parties, counterclaims and rights in rem. It does not deal with the provisions in Article 8(1) dealing with multiple defendants, which is considered in Practice Note: E&W Brussels I (recast)—multiple defendants (art 8) [Archived]. Impact of UK’s departure from the EU Following exit day (ie 31 January 2020), the UK became a third state in respect of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). As a result of transitional provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU, the UK remained subject to Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) during the implementation period, which began on exit day and ended on IP completion day (ie 31 December 2020, at 11 pm). The position post IP completion day requires

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note explains how tort and delict claims are dealt with under Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2021, Brussels I (recast). It considers the meaning of tort and delict claims under Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). The Practice Note provides information on how Article 7(2) is to be interpreted—one pivotal aspect of that interpretation arises when determining where the harmful event occurs to determine which court has jurisdiction. Guiding principles, together with examples spanning different types of claims are set out. The Practice Note also considers the position when dealing with co-defendants as well as that of seeking a declaration that a party does not have any liability in either tort or delict. For guidance on the harmful event for specific types of claims, see Practice Note: E&W Brussels I (recast)—the harmful event for specific tort and delict claims (art 7(2)) [Archived]. For guidance when dealing with contract claims under the regulation,

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note considers the question of when a court is seised of proceedings under Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). Deciding which court is first seised is fundamental to the operation of Articles 29–31 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) which concern the prevention and regulation of concurrent proceedings. For information on the equivalent provisions within Regulation (EC) 44/2001, Brussels I, see Practice Note: Brussels I—when is a court seized ? (art 30) [Archived]. Impact of UK’s departure from the EU Following exit day (ie 31 January 2020), the UK became a third state in respect of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). As a result of transitional provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU, the UK remained subject to Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) during the implementation period, which began on exit day and ended on IP completion day (ie 31 December 2020, at 11 pm). The

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note provides guidance when seeking to enforce a judgment in the courts of England and Wales under the provisions in Regulation (EC) 44/2001, Brussels I. A judgment can only be recognised and enforced under the enforcement regime in this regulation if the proceedings were instituted prior to 10 January 2015. For assistance as to the appropriate enforcement regime, if the guidance in this Practice Note is not applicable, see: Which regime applies to enforce a foreign judgment?—checklist. This Practice Note sets out the application of Regulation (EC) 44/2001, Brussels I when dealing with the enforcement of judgments involving EU Member States. It sets out the general rules for enforcement followed by the procedure for enforcement (involving obtaining a declaration of enforceability), including appealing a declaration of enforceability. The procedure for enforcement of an EU judgment in England and Wales, requiring a registration order, is also explained as well as how those orders can be appealed. For guidance on

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note provides guidance when seeking to recognise a judgment in the courts of England and Wales for the purposes of enforcement under the provisions in Regulation (EC) 44/2001, Brussels I. A judgment can only be recognised and enforced under the enforcement regime in this regulation if the proceedings were instituted between 1 March 2002 and 9 January 2015. For assistance as to the appropriate enforcement regime, if the guidance in this Practice Note is not applicable, see: Which regime applies to enforce a foreign judgment?—checklist. This Practice Note considers the provisions in Articles 32–37 of Regulation (EC) 44/2001, Brussels I dealing with the recognition of judgments, settlements or authentic instruments. It sets out the general provisions and then looks at whether an application for recognition is required. Applications for recognition are addressed, both when seeking recognition in England and Wales, as well as in an EU Member State. The Practice Note also considers, in

Law360, London: Owners of electric bicycles in Europe will not have to buy mandatory motor insurance after a landmark ruling on 12 October 2023 by the Court of Justice, which found that the bikes do not count as motor vehicles.

This Practice Note provides practical guidance on electronic commerce (e-commerce) at the World Trade Organization (WTO). Introduction E-commerce has been a focus at the WTO almost since the formation of the WTO in 1995. In May of 1998, the Second Ministerial Conference (held in Geneva) adopted the declaration on global electronic commerce (the ‘Declaration’). The Declaration recognised that e-commerce is growing and presenting new opportunities for trade. The Declaration further urged the WTO General Council to establish a comprehensive work programme to examine all trade-related issuing arising from global e-commerce. For guidance on the General Council, see Practice Note: Institutions of the World Trade Organization. In September 1998, the General Council duly adopted the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. The General Council establishes the work programme and ensures that it is continually reviewed as it is a standing item on its agenda. In addition the General Council is responsible for consigned any trade-related issue of a cross-cutting nature that does not fall within the work programme for the four WTO bodies listed below. Work

The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has announced that the E-Filing pilot scheme went live in the Administrative Court Office on 1 October 2024. This is the external element of CE-File that allows court users to file claims and relevant material electronically as well as link to their case on the case management system. The E-filing service will be available to court users 24 hours a day. A date for mandatory E-filing for professional court users is yet to be determined.

E-mobility is the umbrella term for the use of electric vehicles. E-mobility is currently experiencing an increase in demand in response to political and societal pressure to decarbonise the economy. E-mobility offers two general advantages. With the movement away from conventional fossil fuels to electricity and alternative fuels, it is possible to centralise the source of pollution away from exhaust pipes to power plants, and with the increase of renewable energy generators, it is possible to decarbonise transport to a great extent.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has announced that Nvayo Limited (Nvayo), an e-money and payment services entered special administration on 10 February 2025 under the Payment and Electrical Money Institution Insolvency Regulations 2021. This follows restrictions placed on Nvayo by the FCA due to serious concerns about the firm and its compliance with anti-money laundering (AML) rules. Navyo’s application to suspend the FCA’s restrictions was rejected by the Upper Tribunal in February 2024.

This guide sets out how e-signatures are used in various international jurisdictions. The table provides a quick-reference summary of whether e-signatures are used and in what capacity in different countries. More detailed guidance on each overseas jurisdiction covered by the table is set out in the sections below. For information on the execution of contracts in various jurisdictions, see Practice Note: Execution of contracts—jurisdictional guide. For information on execution of deeds in various jurisdictions, see Practice Note: Execution of deeds—jurisdictional guide. For information on the formation of contracts in various jurisdictions, see Practice Note: Contract formation—jurisdictional guide. For information on the execution of documents under Scots law, see Execution—Scotland—overview. Please note that this is intended as an introductory guide only and local advice from appropriate legal professionals in the relevant country should be sought where appropriate. Summary table Can documents be signed electronically in your jurisdiction, and are such signatures admissible in evidence? Are there certification authorities or other national organisations which verify the electronic signature of documents? Are