The Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2014, SI 2014/2852 set out conditions known as ‘general binding rules’ that apply to all operators of small sewage discharges (SSDs); see Practice Note: Environmental Permitting Regulations 2016—domestic septic tanks and small sewage treatment plants for full details. Note

What section 58 of the Housing Associations Act 1985 provides Section 58 of the Housing Associations Act 1985 (HAA 1985) states: ‘(1) A local authority may promote the formation or extension of a housing association. (2) A local authority may for the assistance of a housing association subscribe for share or loan capital of the association. (3) A local authority may make a loan to an unregistered self-build society for the purpose of enabling it to meet the whole or part of the expenditure incurred, or to be incurred by it, in carrying out its objects. (4) This section does not apply where the housing association is— (a) a private registered provider of social housing, or (b) a registered social landlord (for which corresponding provision is made by section 22 of the Housing Act 1996).’ To whom

In this Q&A we have limited our research to cover contractual indemnities giving rise to costs liabilities. Approach of courts to indemnities providing for recovery of costs The Court of Appeal in Gomba Holdings v Minories Finance held that the court's discretion as to costs (CPR 44.2(2)(b)) will normally be exercised to correspond with the contractual entitlement agreed by the parties. This will include, where provided, contractual indemnities. In other words, courts can and will give effect to indemnities when making orders as to costs including ordering costs to be assessed on an indemnity basis (see Practice Note: Indemnity costs orders—principles). Note that in Gomba Holdings the Court of Appeal held that a receiving party who benefits from an contractual indemnity cannot recover costs that have not been reasonably incurred or are unreasonable in amount. Examples The Practice Note: Costs—recovery of costs under contractual clauses in the section

Property Disputes analysis: This was a landmark application and success for the government and leaseholders everywhere, being the first under section 123 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022) for a remediation order, in this case in relation to Vista Tower in Stevenage (the Property). The Property had defective cladding and the order was sought to remedy the defects. The respondent was the Property’s freehold owner. Written by Keith Chipato and Jonathan Pennington Legh, barristers at Field Court Chambers.

A hate crime is a criminal offence perceived to be motivated (wholly or partly) by hostility, bias or prejudice towards a protected characteristic of the victim, typically race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or transgender identity (and, in some contexts, gender). In England and Wales, “hate crime” is a practice term rather than a single statutory label. Relevant offences are prosecuted using specific racially or religiously aggravated offences (Crime and Disorder Act 1998) and hostility-based sentencing uplifts (Criminal Justice Act 2003). Scotland uses statutory aggravations for prejudice relating to disability, sexual orientation, transgender identity and variations in sex characteristics, and for racial and religious prejudice (including under the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021). Northern Ireland also relies on statutory aggravations for hostility based on race, religion, sexual orientation and disability. In Ireland, the Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Act 2024 introduces specific hate offences and aggravations for certain protected characteristics. Across all four jurisdictions, hate crime affects charging decisions, evidential requirements (including “perception” tests), sentencing, recording practices and victim support, and is a significant focus of criminal justice policy and human rights compliance.

The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 (LFRA 2024) amended the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925) and introduced a new concept of a ‘regulated rentcharge’ (LFRA 2024, ss 113(2) and 124(2)(a) and LPA 1925, s 120A(1)). A ‘regulated rentcharge’ is any rentcharge of a type that could not be created under section 2 of the Rentcharges Act 1977 (RcA 1977)—see LPA 1925, s 120A(1) and Practice Note: Rentcharges—apportionment, termination and enforcement (which refers to ‘regulated rentcharges’ as ‘Historic Rentcharges’). On and from 27 November 2023, remedies under LPA 1925, s 121 are no longer available in relation to a ‘regulated rentcharge’ (LPA 1925, s 121(1A) and LFRA 2024, s 113(5)). Note that there are anti-avoidance provisions that apply (see LPA 1925,

The 2016 editions of the Scottish Building Contract Committee (SBCC) contracts have not yet been published. However, the SBCC has confirmed to us that publication will be starting shortly, and that the contracts will be released in the same order as the JCT 2016 contracts (starting with

Arbitration analysis: Saloni v Nexity is a rare application by a French court of first instance, of the fairly recently introduced theory of unforeseeability (imprévision). The court held that the price spike in energy costs, transport and packaging as a result particularly of the Russian war in Ukraine, excessively impacting on the supplier, justified the dissolution of the contract. It did so on the basis of an altogether scant assessment of the economics behind the contract. The case is likely to encourage the many contracting parties in similar situations to turn to the courts for similar requests. Parties with French law as the applicable law to their contract would do well to exclude the theory from their lex contractus, including in respect of prospective disputes subject to arbitration. Written by Geert van Calster, head of GAVC Law.

Section 85 of Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO 2012) provides that a relevant offence which is punishable on summary conviction by a fine or maximum fine of £5,000 or more (however expressed) becomes punishable on summary conviction by a fine of any amount. An offence is relevant if, immediately before 12 March 2015, it is a common law offence, or it is contained in a statute or a statutory instrument made under an Act. The effect of this was to remove the maximum limit on the financial penalty which the magistrates can impose following summary conviction

We have found no firm authority to confirm that the Charities Act 2011 (CA 2011) repeals any earlier legislative requirements in the context of consents. However see the following general information which may be useful. For information on the different issues that charity trustees must consider when buying land

Background to the standard contractual clauses There was a general prohibition in Directive 95/46/EC (the Data Protection Directive), on controllers transferring personal data to any territory outside the EEA unless an ‘adequate’ level of privacy protection was ensured for the data transferred. This data export restriction was reflected in the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998) as the eighth data protection principle and is discussed in Practice Note: Data protection principles under the DPA 1998 [Archived]. See Article 26(2) of the Data Protection Directive and DPA 1998, Sch 1, Pt I, and ss 13–15 (the eighth principle). There were, however, some exemptions to the general data export prohibition. Controllers based in the EU could transfer personal data to non-EEA countries which provided ‘adequate safeguards with respect to the protection of the privacy and fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals and as regards the exercise of the corresponding rights’. Under the Data Protection Directive, an adequate level of privacy protection could be found if one of the ‘adequacy

There has recently been a legal challenge regarding the EU’s data sharing arrangement with the US, known as the EU‒US Privacy Shield, filed in the General Court on privacy grounds. See: LNB News 31/10/2016 69. There are currently very few details as to the nature of the challenge, however the case page on the General Court’s site