The Evaluation Task Force has published a new annex to the Magenta Book, providing guidance on best practices for evaluating the impact of AI tools and technologies. The guidance, co-produced with the Department for Transport and Frontier Economics, focuses on impact evaluation design and methodology, including the use of Randomised Control Trials for testing new AI products. It also includes hypothetical case studies to illustrate high-quality approaches to evaluating the impact of various AI tools. The guidance will be co-owned with the Central Digital and Data Office, with the Evaluation Task Force working to embed evaluation best practices in digital processes across government.

An evaluation agreement is a contract under which one party (often a potential customer, licensee or investor) is given limited rights to access, test or assess another party’s product, technology, software, data, confidential information or services before deciding whether to enter into a fuller commercial arrangement. The term is descriptive rather than statutory, and is used consistently across England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland.Key features typically include: strict confidentiality and non-disclosure provisions; restrictions on use (for evaluation only, not for commercial exploitation); intellectual property protections confirming that ownership remains with the disclosing party; limits on copying, reverse engineering and disclosure to third parties; security and data protection obligations (particularly where personal data is processed); and disclaimers of warranties and limitations of liability.Evaluation agreements are commonly used in technology, life sciences, procurement and outsourcing, including proof‑of‑concept or pilot projects. They often address return or destruction of materials, feedback ownership, and non-solicitation of staff or customers. Under Scots law they will still be treated as contracts, with formation and interpretation applying general contract principles. Careful drafting is important to avoid unintended licences, joint ownership of IP, or implied obligations arising from the evaluation.

STOP PRESS: As of 24 February 2025, the main provisions of the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023) are in force. Procurements begun on or after this date must be carried out under PA 2023, whereas those begun under the previous legislation (the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016, the Concession Regulations 2016, and the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011) must continue to be procured and managed under that legislation. See Practice Note: Introduction to the Procurement Act 2023—PA 2023. This content relates to the Procurement Act 2023 regime This practical guidance is about public procurement under the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023). For practical guidance on evaluation methodologies under the previous legislation, see Practice Note: Using different evaluation methodologies for different types of public procurement. Distinction between conditions of participation and award criteria This Practice Note focusses on award criteria and the different types of evaluation methodologies that can be used by contracting authorities to select the winning bid in a public procurement process subject to PA

The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) has published a report on its secondary competitiveness and growth objective (SCGO) and noted that some of its key initiatives in recent months—including the initial implementation of the Basel standards and its review of Solvency UK—have contributed to promote growth for the UK financial services sector.

An evaluative fact is a factual conclusion reached by applying a legal or normative standard to primary facts, rather than a simple observation (for example, that conduct was “reasonable”, “negligent”, “dishonest” or “in bad faith”). In practice, courts distinguish between primary facts (what happened) and evaluative facts (the legal characterisation of what happened), especially in appeals, standards of review and pleading.“Evaluative fact” is not generally a defined statutory term in the UK or Ireland, but is a descriptive expression used in case law and academic commentary across civil, criminal and public law. It is significant when deciding whether an appellate court may interfere with a trial judge’s findings, which fact-finder (judge, jury or tribunal) should decide a question, and how to classify issues as fact, law, or mixed fact and law.Usage is broadly consistent in England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, though terminology overlaps with “inference of fact” and “mixed question of fact and law”. Recognising an issue as involving evaluative facts helps practitioners frame grounds of appeal, burden of proof arguments, and the level of deference owed to first‑instance decisions.

A clause capping liability at the level of professional indemnity insurance cover held.

Components of the plant at Sellafield used to reduce the volume of the highly active liquor through evaporation.

Evasion of tax refers to deliberate, dishonest conduct to reduce or avoid a tax liability, typically by concealing income, falsifying records, or misrepresenting facts to HMRC (UK) or Revenue (Ireland). It is distinct from lawful tax avoidance, which involves arranging affairs within the tax legislation.In the UK and Ireland, “tax evasion” is a descriptive term rather than a single codified offence. It encompasses a range of criminal offences, including cheating the public revenue, fraudulent evasion of income tax, VAT or duties, and common law or statutory fraud. The concept is developed through a combination of statute and case law.Key features are intentional deception, knowledge of liability, and a purpose to secure an unlawful tax advantage. Negligent error or careless compliance, without dishonesty, will usually fall outside tax evasion and instead attract civil penalties.The term is used consistently across England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, although the underlying offences, procedures and penalties differ by jurisdiction. It is central to criminal tax investigations, corporate criminal liability (including failure to prevent the facilitation of tax evasion), money laundering risk assessments and professional conduct obligations for advisers.

Simply stated, the answer to all these questions is in the affirmative. Yes, even if a trade deal is reached, there is a real likelihood that it will not cover cross border insolvency issues. Yes, my understanding is that the Brexit Insolvency Regulations, SI 2019/145 will apply once the Brexit implementation period is completed on the 31st December 2020 at 11 pm UK time. Regulation (EU) 2015/848 (the Insolvency Regulation) will no longer apply as far as the UK is concerned, except in relation to cases where main insolvency proceedings have already been opened before the Brexit completion period has elapsed. The

The analysis of initiating events and their consequences. An event tree starts with an initiating event and develops sequences, based on whether a plant system succeeds or fails in performing its function, and the response of related systems. An event tree provides a graphical and probabilistic representation of the various possible sequences, and hence can be used to determine the probability of negative outcomes from a particular initiating event.

Spotlight on Corruption has reported that it held a multi-stakeholder roundtable to discuss compensating the overseas victims of corruption. The event highlighted the significant challenges faced by overseas victims of corruption, including difficulties in accessing justice and obtaining compensation. Experts at the event discussed various legal and systemic barriers, such as jurisdictional issues and lack of resources, which hinder victims' efforts. The discussions underscored the importance of international cooperation, legal reform, and the establishment of more robust mechanisms to support victims and hold perpetrators accountable. The event called for increased awareness and action to address these pressing issues.

The contractually specified reason or event that allows the non-defaulting party to end the agreement.