ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note provides an overview of the exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000) and an analysis of the exemptions relied upon by public authorities in the first ten years of the regime. It considers the most successful exemptions (from the public authority’s perspective), based on decisions upheld or partly upheld by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO). The note also provides a statistical overview of trends in relation to complaints referred to the ICO. This Practice Note is not maintained. It is for background information only. Method of analysis Under the FIA 2000, a requester may ask for any information that is held by a public authority. FIA 2000, Pt II provides for a number of specific exemptions to the principle of access to information. Such exemptions exist primarily to protect information that should not be disclosed because such disclosure could be against the public interest or because it could be damaging to

Sharing parental responsibility More than one person may have parental responsibility for the same child at the same time. A parent does not cease to have parental responsibility solely because another person acquires it. Where those sharing parental responsibility do not agree as to its exercise, any issue may have to be resolved by the court by the making of an application for a specific issue order or a prohibited steps order. See Practice Notes: Specific issue orders and Prohibited steps orders. The right of independent action Where more than one person has parental responsibility for the same child, each of them may act alone and without the other in meeting that responsibility subject to any enactment that requires the consent in a matter affecting the child. The ability to act alone is subject to the limitation that a person with parental responsibility may not act in any way that would be incompatible with any order made in respect to the child under the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989). Wardship also limits the freedom to exercise

Share options gives the option holder the right to buy and sell shares at a predetermined price. The exercise of share options relates to the process of paying that pre-determined price (know as the exercise/strike/option price [can we link to this glossary term]) and receiving the shares under the option.

This all-encompassing resource pack contains a step-by-step guide for a company administering the exercise of employee share options and the subsequent allotment/transfer of shares, and contains links and useful resources to assist in this process. This resource pack can be used in relation to the exercise of enterprise management incentives (EMI) options, company share option plan (CSOP) options, or unapproved share options (including those granted under a long-term incentive plan (LTIP) and can be used as a reference for both private and listed companies. It is not suitable for use in relation to the exercise of Save as you earn (SAYE) options. Step Details of step Useful resources Timing of step 1 Do the terms governing the option permit the exercise of the option in the given circumstances? Has the option already lapsed so that it can no longer be exercised? The ability to exercise will very much depend upon the relevant option documentation, as there is considerable flexibility regarding the design of option plans—particularly in relation to unapproved options. Therefore, all documentation which

The price at which an option holder has the right to buy or sell the underlying asset. Also known as the strike price.

This Checklist sets out a non-exhaustive list of issues that may need to be considered when preparing to exercise a break option. For full guidance, see Practice Notes: • Break clauses and notices—exercising breaks and conditions precedent • Break clauses and notices—service • How to exercise a tenant break option • How to exercise a landlord redevelopment break option Begin with a general review of the break clause requirements, including conditions and deadlines: • check which party is entitled to exercise the break option (it may be one party, or either (a ‘mutual break’)) • check the break option is exercisable at the intended time • verify if there is a rolling break, fixed date(s) break, or event-triggered break • check for pre-conditions (for example payment of rent or giving vacant possession) and when they must be complied with (usually at the break date but other deadlines may apply) • review provisions for service of notices • check notice periods required and make diary notes • for leases protected by the Landlord

Local Government analysis: The Court of Appeal dismissed Network Rail Infrastructure Limited's appeal against a decision of the Upper Tribunal concerning the business rates treatment of advertising rights at Victoria Station and Liverpool Street Station in London. The court held that sections 64(2) and 65(8) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 (LGFA 1988) deem a qualifying right to use land for the purpose of exhibiting advertisements a hereditament in the occupation of the person entitled to the right. The court rejected Network Rail's argument that the phrase ‘let out’ in LGFA 1988, s 64(2) required a qualitative assessment of the degree of separation between the advertising right and the host hereditament. Instead, the court found that ‘let out’ simply referred to the creation of such a right, with no additional requirement for paramountcy of occupation or control. Written by Tim Baldwin, barrister, Garden Court Chambers.

Banking & Finance analysis: In the case of Vietjet Aviation, the court drew a clear distinction between the lender’s entitlement to exercise rights assigned under the security document, which could arise immediately, and its rights to enforce the security, which would arise after an ‘enforcement event’. It also confirmed the broad Argo Fund meaning of the term ‘financial institution’.

The MiFID II passporting regime One of the most important facets of the recast Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (Directive 2014/65/EU) (MiFID II) and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (Regulation (EU) 600/2014) (MIFIR) (together the MiFID II framework) is the ability for investment firms authorised in one EEA Member State to provide services in other Member States, either on a cross-border basis (eg by telephone or internet) or by establishing a branch in another Member State without having to be authorised separately in each Member State where they carry on business. This is known as 'passporting'. This Practice Note explores the regulatory regime that governs passporting. It also covers access arrangements to multilateral trading facilities (MTFs), organised trading facilities (OTFs) and regulated markets (RMs) in other Member States. For information on the options that third-country firms have to access the EEA market under Article 39 of MiFID II and under Articles 46–49 of MiFIR, see Practice Note: EU MiFID II & MiFIR—third-country regime. For information about tied agents, see Practice Note: EU tied

This Practice Note is focused on preparation of exhibits to witness statements and affidavits. It explains what an exhibit is and sets out practical considerations to take into account when preparing them, setting out where the requirements differ between witness statements and affidavits. It gives guidance on the form of the exhibit, how to organise exhibit bundles and deal with voluminous exhibits, defective exhibits and non-documentary exhibits. Depending on the court your claim is in, additional provisions may apply—see: Court specific guidance. This Practice Note can be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: Affidavits and witness statements supporting interim applications, `Witness statements—substantive content and Drafting witness statements—formalities and dealing with problematic witnesses. Exhibits to witness statements and affidavits An exhibit is comprised of documents or other items used in support of the content of a witness statement or affidavit. Exhibits are referred to in, but remain separate from, the witness statement or affidavit. An exhibit can take the form of photographs, sound recordings, drawings, spreadsheets, correspondence, agreements, etc. References to exhibits are found in

Commercial analysis: Christopher Stirling, barrister at Field Court Chambers, considers the Court of Appeal’s decision in FFI-Global S.r.l v Outeiro Ltd. The case serves as a useful reminder for a number of practice points.

Construction analysis: The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) refused to summarily enforce an adjudicator’s decision in a case involving an existential challenge to the contract pursuant to which the adjudicator had been appointed and allegations of fraud. Applying Pegram Shopfitters v Tally Weijl, the court noted that as this was an existential challenge to contract formation, not a mere misdescription of terms, the adjudicator’s decision on jurisdiction would not be temporarily binding, and enforcement would fail if the defendant, WLP Trading and Marketing Ltd (WLP), had a respectable case that the foundational contract did not exist; the TCC held that there was a real prospect that the adjudicator lacked jurisdiction on this basis. The court rejected the argument that jurisdiction was salvaged because the Scheme for Construction Contracts would have applied under any alternative contractual analysis: appointment under non-existent contractual machinery is fatal. Given that conclusion, the court did not need to determine the fraud allegations or issues of payment into court. The decision underscores the centrality of contract formation to adjudicator jurisdiction and enforcement.