As set out in The economic torts—overview, the law makes provision to protect a person’s trade or business from acts which are considered to be unacceptable. For guidance on claims for: • procuring a breach of contract, see Practice Note: The tort of procuring a breach of contract • intentional violation of rights in a judgment debt, see Practice Note: The Marex tort (interference with a judgment debt) • conspiracy (both by lawful and unlawful means), see Practice Note: Civil conspiracy claims (economic tort) • economic duress, see Practice Note: Economic duress—undue influence—tort of intimidation Civil claims involving fraud and dishonesty often rely on pleading one or more of the economic torts, on which see Practice Note: Civil fraud—causes of action (heads of claim). What is the tort of unlawful interference? Causing loss by unlawful means exists where the defendant interferes with an economic interest of the claimant by unlawful means, the object and intention of which is to cause loss to the claimant and loss is caused to them (OBG v Allan,

Economic torts describe a group of civil wrongs used to protect economic and business interests, typically where one party intentionally interferes with another’s trade, contracts or economic expectations. They are not generally defined in statute but have been developed and refined through case law in England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, and the overall concept is used consistently across these jurisdictions. Core examples include: inducing breach of contract, unlawful means conspiracy, lawful means conspiracy (more restricted in some jurisdictions), intimidation, and causing loss by unlawful means. Key legal features usually include intention to cause economic loss, use of unlawful means or improper interference, and a recognisable economic loss suffered by the claimant. Economic torts are frequently pleaded in commercial litigation, competition-related disputes, shareholder and joint venture fallouts, and cases involving employee poaching or misuse of confidential information (often alongside breach of contract and fiduciary duty claims). Because the boundaries between legitimate competitive behaviour and actionable interference are fact‑sensitive and shaped by leading appellate decisions, economic torts are a critical area for risk assessment, litigation strategy and drafting of commercial contracts across the UK and Ireland.

The Economics Observatory (ECO) has reported that record post-Brexit migration—driven primarily by non-EU workers and students—has supported UK job growth and strengthened public finances, while also increasing pressure on housing. It notes that net migration peaked at 906,000 in 2023 before falling to 431,000 in 2024 following new visa restrictions, yet it remains well above pre-Brexit levels. ECO finds that although migration’s effect on wages is limited, its influence on housing and infrastructure is far more pronounced.

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 30 May 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and commentary. Case facts Outline Ofgem Chapter I investigation into two energy suppliers and one consultancy firm in relation to an alleged breach of competition law for allocating customers and sharing sensitive information.  Latest development On 30 May 2019, Ofgem announced its infringement decision, in which it found that two suppliers, E (Gas and Electricity) Limited and Economy Energy, and Dyball Associates, an energy software and consultancy service, infringed Chapter I of the Competition Act 1998. The companies were fined collectively £870,000. Parties • Economy Energy Trading Limited and its parent Economy Energy Holdings Limited (together Economy Energy), a UK-based supplier of electricity and gas. Most of Economy Energy’s customers are prepayment customers. • E (Gas and Electricity) Limited and its parent E Holdings Limited (together E), a UK-based supplier of electricity and gas. Most

NOTE—to see whether notification thresholds in Ecuador and throughout the world are met, see further: Where to Notify. 1. Have there been any recent developments regarding the Ecuadorian merger control regime and are any updates/developments expected in the coming year? Are there any other ‘hot’ merger control issues in Ecuador? Yes, some changes took place in Ecuador's merger control regime last year (2025). Thee main body of legislation governing merger control is the Organic Law of Regulation and Control of Market Power (LORCPM). However, the Superintendency of Economic Competition (Superintendencia de Competencia Económica or SCE) reformed the Guidelines for Information Management at the end of the year, and then again in March 2026. During the first years of the merger control regime (from 2011 to 2023) files were confidential and not publicly accessible. This changed with a reform to the Guidelines for Information Management in 2023, which made all mandatory notification processes public (except for specific commercially sensible data). In December 2025, the agency reverted their 2023 decision and has now made the files ‘reserved’,

Law 360: A United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) tribunal has unanimously rejected all of Spanish tuna fishing company Albacora SA’s allegations in a $56m arbitration involving Ecuador that stemmed from a dispute over tax exemptions, the country said. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) provided administrative support in the case.

Law360: On 9 May 2024, a company incorporated in the Netherlands, CW Travel Holdings NV, succeeded in the Constitutional Court of Ecuador, arguing that lower courts in Ecuador violated Ecuador's constitution by refusing to consider CW Travel's request to enforce an International Chamber of Commerce arbitration award.

An official newsletter published for the government by Her Majesty’s Stationery Office (HMSO) in which various official announcements are recorded. Details of all bankruptcies and protected trust deeds must be published in the AiB’s Register of Insolvencies

This tracker has been archived and does not reflect events occurring after 19 November 2025. On 9 December 2022, in Written Statement UIN HCWS425, the chancellor of the exchequer, Jeremy Hunt, announced a package of proposed measures for UK financial services, collectively termed the Edinburgh Reforms. For high-level information, see: UK government unveils ‘Edinburgh Reforms’ package for financial services LNB News 09/12/2022 67, 7 areas to look out for in the Edinburgh Reforms package and News Analysis: The Mansion House speech 2023—pensions aspects. See also Video analysis—The Edinburgh Reforms—in this video, Brian McDonnell, Partner at McDonnell Ellis LLP summarises the key considerations in the Edinburgh Reforms and how it will impact the financial services sector. On 10 July 2023, in his Mansion House speech, the chancellor of the exchequer, Jeremy Hunt outlined the government’s planned reforms to the financial services sector. Hunt discussed changes to the prospectus regime to incentivise companies to grow and list in the UK; delivering a smarter regulatory framework; digitisation and the future of payments; and reform of consumer credit

The Netherlands Arbitration Institute (NAI) has implemented editorial amendments to its 2024 Arbitration Rules, effective 31 December 2024. These changes encompass various articles, including clarifications on financing party references, arbitration request withdrawals and appointment procedures. Notably, the amendments align Article 40(2) with the Dutch Arbitration Act regarding security for costs and explicitly state the arbitral tribunal's authority to order legal assistance costs without express party demand. The revisions also emphasise the NAI Board's non-involvement in individual case outcomes and specify the fixed fee payment structure for Challenge Chamber members. These refinements aim to enhance clarity and efficiency in NAI-administered arbitrations.

The Press Complaints Commission's (PCC) Editors’ Code Of Practice was first introduced in 1991 and last amended in January 2012. The code contains provisions on accuracy, opportunity to reply, privacy, harassment, intrusion into grief or shock, reporting on children, reporting on crime and victims of sexual assault, clandestine devices and subterfuge, discrimination, confidential sources and other issues. Certain sections of the code contain exceptions where action can be demonstrated to be in the public interest.

The Education Act 1996 (EA 1996) imposes criminal liability on a parent who fails to ensure that his child receives regular education. All the offences created by the EA 1996 are summary only, which means they can only be tried in the magistrates' court. Procedure Under the EA 1996 criminal proceedings can only be instituted by a local education authority and no other prosecuting body. Before instituting proceedings the local authority must first consider whether it would be appropriate (instead of or in addition to instituting proceedings) to apply to the court for an 'Education Supervision Order' (ESO). Elements of the offence of failing to comply with school attendance order The prosecution must prove that: • a parent • has failed to comply • with the requirements of a school attendance centre order Parent In the EA 1996 'parent' in relation to a child or young person includes any person who is not a parent but who has 'parental responsibility'