The EU-UK Specialised Committee on Aviation Safety is set to convene on 26 November 2025, both in Brussels and online, for its fifth meeting. The provisional agenda highlights key reviews, including joint progress reports by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on the implementation of Annex 30 and the outcomes from the Certification Oversight Board. Additionally, representatives from Technical Agents will discuss air traffic management cooperation in cross-border oversight and safety information exchange. The session will also address the future scope of aviation safety measures and finalise plans for the subsequent meeting, proposed to be hosted by the UK.

Introduction The EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) is an agreement between the European Union (EU) and the UK that formally entered into force on 1 May 2021 following Brexit. It sets out preferential arrangements in key areas of association between the EU and the UK on areas such as trade in goods and services, digital trade, intellectual property, public procurement, aviation and road transport, energy, fisheries, social security coordination, law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, thematic cooperation and participation in EU programmes. It is underpinned by provisions ensuring a level playing field and respect for fundamental rights. The EU was able to enter into the TCA through the provisions in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Article 218. In the UK, the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020 (EU(FR)A 2020) created a framework through which the TCA could be implemented by regulations, rather than implementing the agreement directly with immediate effect. For more information on the EU(FR)A 2020, see New Analysis: Examining the European Union (Future Relationship)

Public Law analysis: In the first analysis in this series, Steve Peers, Professor of EU and Human Rights Law at the University of Essex, provides a summary and overview of the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), with links to his first reading the agreement on Twitter. The analysis also links to a comprehensive list of further reading on the treaty.

On 24 December 2020, the European Commission and UK government announced an agreement in principle on the legal terms of the future UK-EU relationship. Provisionally applicable from 1 January 2021, and fully in force from 1 May 2021, the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) includes terms on trade in goods and services, economic and social co-operation, law enforcement and security co-operation, as well as overarching governance provisions. The TCA is supplemented by a number of associated declarations and agreements, including an Agreement on Security Procedures for Exchanging and Protecting Classified Information (SIA), plus a separate Nuclear Cooperation Agreement (NCA). It also contains a number of placeholders and commitments in respect of further agreements to follow. Announced just one week before the end of the Brexit transition period at 11 pm on 31 December 2020 (IP completion day), the agreement came at the eleventh hour, leaving little time to put in place the necessary legal and practical arrangements to make the deal fully operational before the end of the Brexit transition period on

Environment analysis: This analysis unpacks the Arbitration Tribunal’s final decision regarding the dispute between the EU and the UK. The tribunal was tasked with deciding whether the UK’s decision to impose a ban on sandeel fishing in the UK waters of the North Sea was in line with the obligations and principles laid out in the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). Ultimately, the tribunal found that, substantially, the ban on sandeel fishing was legitimate and that the ban was aligned with the ecological conservation aspirations of the TCA. However, procedurally the tribunal found that England had not sufficiently considered the principle of proportionality. Consequently, England is required to make adjustments to ensure that they respect their responsibilities under the TCA. The ban is permitted to remain in place while these adjustments are being made. Written by Noa Brawermann of Ardea International.

This tracker covers the development of the EU-US Data Privacy Framework (DPF) following the invalidation of the Safe Harbor and Privacy Shield frameworks. The DPF facilitates international transfers of personal data to the US by way of an adequacy decision (Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/1795 of 10 July 2023 pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the adequate level of protection of personal data under the EU-US Data Privacy Framework) where such transfers would otherwise be prohibited by the EU General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR). An outline of the concept of adequacy is provided below, however, this tracker should be read alongside Practice Note: EU GDPR—transfers of personal data internationally and to international organisations for further information. In brief, Article 44 of the EU GDPR prohibits the transfer of personal data to a third country outside of the EEA, or to an ‘international organisation’ (an international transfer). However, in certain circumstances, an international transfer of personal data may be permitted where the transfer

MLex: A US Supreme Court ruling allowing the president to fire executive officers at will has injected fresh uncertainty into the EU-US Data Privacy Framework.

MLex: A European court has rejected a challenge by a French lawmaker against a trans-Atlantic data transfer agreement. The EU's first-tier General Court ruled that the EU-US Data Privacy Framework is valid because it provides adequate protection of EU citizens' personal data once transferred to the US. The EU tribunal said that a Data Protection Review Court set up by the framework is independent. The EU court also said that US law ensures a 'level of legal protection that is essentially equivalent to that guaranteed by EU law'. The decision can be appealed to the Court of Justice.

The European Forum for Good Clinical Practice (EFGCP) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) have announced that their EU-X-CT initiative has opened a public consultation on draft recommendations for cross-border clinical trials. The initiative aims to improve safe and equitable access to trials across Europe by addressing current challenges faced by cross-border participants. Developed in collaboration with over 100 members from 32 countries, the recommendations focus on key aspects of clinical trial management and conduct. The public consultation, running until 10 March 2025, seeks stakeholder feedback to finalise the recommendations and ensure they meet the needs of all parties involved in cross-border clinical research.

This Practice Note summarises the key legal developments relating to proposals by EU/EEA Member States to introduce a discretionary 'call-in' power enabling their national competition authorities (NCAs) to review merger transactions despite not meeting mandatory notification thresholds. Note—this tracker is limited to proposed or prospective powers in EU/EEA Member States. Jurisdictions where the relevant below-threshold merger review power already exists are not included. To track merger transactions in the EU/EEA that have been called in for review by national competition authorities despite not meeting mandatory notification thresholds, see further: EU/EEA below-threshold mergers—called-in cases tracker To track merger transactions in the EU that have been called in for review by NCAs following the Court of Justice’s judgment in Case C- 449/21 Towercast despite not meeting mandatory notification thresholds, see further: EU below-threshold mergers under Article

This table tracks concentrations in the EU/EEA that have been called in for review by national competition authorities despite not meeting mandatory merger notification thresholds. It excludes cases that were voluntarily notified by the parties. In addition to the jurisdictions included in the table below, Cyprus and Slovenia also have the power to review concentrations that fall below the mandatory merger notification thresholds. Note—only cases from 2014 onwards that have been made public are included in this table. 2026 Jurisdiction Parties Market Competition concerns Current developments Ireland Uniphar/TouchStore National wholesale pharmaceutical supply, pharmacy software, and/or retail pharmacy sectors Vertical input-foreclosure risks with conglomerate elements • Referred to phase 2—03/09/2026• Called in—20/03/2026 2025 Jurisdiction Parties Market Competition concerns Current developments Denmark OneMed/Kirstine Hardam National ostomy appliances (stoma aids) and associated services for patient care Horizontal unilateral effects and/or creation or strengthening of a dominant position • Final outcome—pending• Called in—27/08/2025 Denmark Uber/Dantaxi National taxi intermediation services Horizontal unilateral effects • Final outcome—24/08/2026; conditionally approved• Notification submitted—15/09/2025• Called in—25/08/2025 Norway Infomedia/Retriever Aktiebolag National media monitoring Horizontal unilateral effects and/or creation or strengthening

Law360, London: The EU Intellectual Property Office has said it is now using AI to help to assess the trademark applications it receives through its simplified e-filing tool.