PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: The claimant failed to satisfy either limb of section 2(2)(a) of the Animals Act 1971 (AA 1971). The court held that the degree of ‘particularity’ to be applied in determining the likelihood of injury and likelihood of severe injury must not be so high as to mandate a conclusion or too general to render the assessment artificial. For the purposes of AA 1971, s2(2)(b) the court found that where the horse simply saw or heard something or thought it saw or heard something in its environment and shied, the claimant could not prove the horse was reacting to a perceived threat, and therefore there was no ‘characteristic’ behaviour. Alternatively, if there was, then the characteristic behaviour was not referable to a particular time or circumstance, and the claim would still fail under AA 1971, s 2(2)(b). The court held that the claimant had dishonestly embellished the extent of her injuries, but due to her disclosing certain facts (prior to the defendant’s disclosure of surveillance material) and given such dishonesty going only to the value of PSLA, that dishonesty was not fundamental, by a narrow margin. Written by Georgina Crawford, barrister at Ropewalk Chambers.

Law360, London: The Court of Justice ruled on 9 July 2026 that a company isn't liable for copyright infringement if it uses adequate geo-blocking measures to restrict access to a publication that is still protected in some jurisdictions.

In public law children proceedings annex documents are those specified in the Public Law Outline to be annexed/included with Form C110A (application for a care or supervision order and applications for other orders under Part IV of the Children Act 1989) and filed with the court.

Property analysis: In a case of interest to property litigators, the High Court has found that a restrictive covenant created on 6 April 1922 concerning land in the centre of Bath (part of which is the home of Bath Rugby club) remained enforceable by a group of local residents. In reaching that conclusion, the court considered the law relating to the requirements for the annexation of the benefit of restrictive covenants such as may render them enforceable between successors in title to the original parties to the covenant. In a separate judgment on costs the court interpreted and applied the rule of practice which afforded favourable treatment to defendants to such claims; in this case awarding the defendants who had opposed the claim their costs on the indemnity basis throughout. Written by William Moffett, barrister at Radcliffe Chambers and counsel to the seventh and eighth defendants in this case. He also represented the third, fourth, seventh and eighth defendants on the question of costs.

Not for release, publication or distribution (in whole or in part, directly or indirectly) in, into or from any jurisdiction where to do so would constitute a violation of the relevant laws or regulations of such jurisdiction. [insert date] For immediate release [Recommended] [cash] offer (the Offer) by [Insert name of offeror] for [Insert name of offeree] PLC Offer unconditional[ in all respects] On [insert date of Rule 2.7 announcement], the board[s] of [insert full name of Offeror][ and [insert full name of Offeree]] announced under Rule 2.7 of the Code that [[Offeror] had made OR they had reached agreement on the terms of] a[n] [ recommended] [ cash] offer[ to be made by [Offeror]] to acquire[ the entire issued and to be issued] ordinary share capital of [Offeree]. The full terms and conditions of the Offer, together with the procedures for acceptance of the Offer, were set out in the offer document issued by [Offeror] on [insert date of offer document] (the Offer Document). Other than as expressly set out in this announcement, the terms used but not defined in this announcement have the meanings given to

This archived Precedent is an announcement declaring an offer unconditional as to acceptances. It has not been maintained since the Takeover Code’s revision in July 2021. The Code now provides that, subject to certain exceptions, the acceptance condition should only be capable of being satisfied once all of the other offer conditions have been satisfied or waived. For a sample announcement declaring an offer unconditional, see Precedent: Announcement declaring offer unconditional. Not for release, publication or distribution (in whole or in part, directly or indirectly) in, into or from any jurisdiction where to do so would constitute a violation of the relevant laws or regulations of such jurisdiction. [insert date] For immediate release [Recommended][ cash] offer (the Offer) by [Insert name of offeror] for [Insert name of offeree] PLC Offer unconditional as to acceptances On [insert date of Rule 2.7 announcement], the board[s] of [insert full name of Offeror][ and [insert full name of Offeree]] announced under Rule 2.7 of the Code that [[Offeror] had made OR they had

Not for release, publication or distribution (in whole or in part, directly or indirectly) in, into or from any jurisdiction where to do so would constitute a violation of the relevant laws or regulations of such jurisdiction. [ New offeror shares to be issued pursuant to the offer have not been and will not be registered in the united states of america under the securities act of 1933, as amended, nor under any relevant securities laws in canada, australia, or japan. ] [insert date] For immediate release Recommended [Cash ]offer (the Offer) of [Insert name of offeree] PLC by [Insert name of offeror] Results of court meeting and general meeting On [insert date of Rule 2.7 announcement], the boards of [insert full name of Offeree] ([Offeree]) and [insert full name of Offeror] ([Offeror]) announced under Rule 2.7 of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers (Code) that they had reached agreement on the terms of a recommended[ cash] offer by [Offeror] to acquire the entire issued and to be issued ordinary share capital of [Offeree]

Not for release, publication or distribution (in whole or in part, directly or indirectly) in, into or from any jurisdiction where to do so would constitute a violation of the relevant laws or regulations of such jurisdiction. [insert date] For immediate release Recommended [Cash ]offer (the Offer) of [Insert name of offeree] PLC by [Insert name of offeror] Court sanction of scheme of arrangement On [insert date of Rule 2.7 announcement], the boards of [insert full name of Offeree] ([Offeree]) and [insert full name of Offeror] ([Offeror]) announced under Rule 2.7 of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers (Code) that they had reached agreement on the terms of a recommended[ cash] offer by [Offeror] to acquire the entire issued and to be issued ordinary share capital of [Offeree] (the Acquisition) to be implemented by means of a court-sanctioned scheme of arrangement under Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 (the Scheme). The full terms and conditions of the Scheme were set out in the scheme document issued by [Offeree] on [insert date

Not for release, publication or distribution (in whole or in part, directly or indirectly) in, into or from any jurisdiction where to do so would constitute a violation of the relevant laws or regulations of such jurisdiction. [ New offeror shares to be issued pursuant to the offer have not been and will not be registered in the united states of america under the securities act of 1933, as amended, nor under any relevant securities laws in canada, australia, or japan. ] [insert date] For immediate release Recommended [Cash ]offer (the Offer) of [Insert name of offeree] PLC by [Insert name of offeror] Scheme becomes effective On [insert date of Rule 2.7 announcement], the boards of [insert full name of Offeree] ([Offeree]) and [insert full name of Offeror] ([Offeror]) announced under Rule 2.7 of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers (Code) that they had reached agreement on the terms of a recommended[ cash] offer by [Offeror] to acquire the entire issued and to be issued ordinary share capital of [Offeree] (the Acquisition) to be implemented by means

The City Code on Takeovers and Mergers (Code) is the principal source of rules governing: • the timing, manner and specific content of announcements before and during a takeover bid • the disclosure of shareholdings and dealings during an offer period (see Practice Note: Disclosure of interests—The Code) Practice Statement 20: Rule 2—Secrecy, possible offer announcements and pre-announcement responsibilities describes the way in which the Takeover Panel (Panel) normally interprets and applies the provisions of Rule 2 of the Code relating to the need for secrecy before, and the timing and contents of, possible offer announcements, including the steps which the Panel expects the parties to a possible offer and their advisers to take in order to ensure they comply with their responsibilities under Rule 2. This Practice Note describes the various announcements that offerees and offerors may be required, under the Code, to publish during the course of an offer, covering: • Announcements prior to a bid • Announcement of a possible offer • Announcement of a formal sale process • Identification of offerors • The 'put-up or shut-up' regime • 'No

General During the lifetime of an agreement (and sometimes afterwards) one or more of the parties may wish to inform third parties about certain matters regarding the existence of the agreement, its subject matter, or events arising from the operation of the agreement. The type of information envisaged is that which is contained in public announcements or press releases made by one or more of the parties (eg to inform investors, potential investors, the press, potential customers or regulatory authorities). This type of announcement is usually distinct from information which results from the operation of the agreement (eg in a consultancy agreement, the consultant may make regular reports of the work it carries out and provide the information to its client or sometimes third parties). However, the parties will not normally wish to allow each other to freely release information to third parties and will insert a clause in the agreement which forbids all or some of the parties from releasing certain (or all) information. The general aim of an announcements clause is to control the form of public

Total radiation dose received by an individual in a one year period.