Corporate Crime Analysis: In R v Derrick Cooper, the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against conviction based on the inconsistent verdicts which the jury had given. Jacqueline Carey, barrister at 2 Bedford Row Chambers and counsel in the case, considers the learning points which practitioners can take from the judgment.

There are procedural requirements that practitioners must be aware of when appealing sentences imposed in health and safety cases to the Crown Court or to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). The Court of Appeal has considered a number of sentences imposed in health and safety cases and has given guidance to practitioners on a number of issues particularly the proper sentencing approach when dealing with very large companies, when dealing with public organisations, when dealing with companies with small operating profits and in respect of costs incurred by the prosecution. Appeal from the magistrates’ court to the Crown Court Section 108 of the Magistrates Courts Act 1980 (MCA 1980) gives a defendant a right to appeal against sentence or against conviction and the sentence that has been passed by the magistrates’ court. The procedure for appealing is set out in Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, Pt 34. See Practice Notes: Appealing a conviction in the Crown Court, Appeal

This Practice Note considers the amended 2012 Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme which came into force on 13 June 2019. Time limits for the appeal If the victim of crime is still unhappy with the decision following a review by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA), they have the option of appealing the decision to the first-tier tribunal created by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The appeals procedure will be governed by the Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (Social Entitlement Chamber) Rules 2008, SI 2008/2685. The notice of appeal must be received by the first tier tribunal within 90 days of the CICA’s review decision. This 90-day period can be extended by the tribunal where there are good reasons for doing so and it would be fair to do so. The request can be made on the Notice of Appeal itself. Only the tribunal has jurisdiction to grant an extension and not the CICA. Grounds for an appeal If the victim of crime is appealing because no compensation award

Background to the Joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities The Joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities (Board of Appeal) is a joint body of the European Supervisory Authorities (Authorities), namely: • European Banking Authority (EBA) • European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) • European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) For more information on the Authorities, see Practice Note: The European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) and the European System of Financial Supervision and Lexis+® UK Banking & Finance Practice Note: The European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) and the European System of Financial Supervision. The Board of Appeal reviews complaints brought against the decisions of the Authorities. Its decisions are subject to appeal before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Current staff of the national competent authorities, or other national or EU institutions involved in the activities of the Authorities, are not eligible for service on the Board of Appeal. The Board of Appeal is composed of six members and six

This Practice Notice looks at what needs to be considered if appealing a costs order; the starting point being that appeals of costs orders are discouraged. It sets out the preliminary considerations and the basis for an appeal against a costs order (also known as a costs only appeal), which are governed by CPR 52. It also considers the time limits for an appeal, obtaining permission to appeal, challenging a decision refusing permission to appeal, where the appeal should be made, the documents required to commence an appeal and the effect of an appeal. This Practice Note does not consider: • an appeal against the decision of a costs officer as such appeals are subject to special rules set out in CPR 47.21 to CPR 47.24. For information, see Practice Note: Detailed assessment—appeals • recovering the costs incurred in an appeal. For guidance, see Practice Note: Appeals—costs recovery • appeals generally. For guidance, see: Civil appeals: general and preliminary considerations—overview Appeals as to costs are discouraged The general approach of the court to an appeal

For a list of key Pensions Ombudsman determinations we have reported on, see Practice Note: Pensions ombudsman determination tracker. The appeal process in summary The starting point is that a determination by the Pensions Ombudsman (the Ombudsman) of a complaint or dispute and any consequential direction given in relation to a scheme is final and binding on: • the person by whom, or on whose behalf, the complaint or reference to the Ombudsman was made • any person (if different) responsible for the management of the scheme to which the complaint or reference relates, and • any person claiming under those persons However, this is expressly subject to the statutory right of appeal contained in section 151(4) of the Pension Schemes Act 1993 (PSA 1993), as to which: • an appeal may be brought against a determination and/or consequential directions that are final and binding (see: What determinations and decisions may be the subject of an appeal?, below) • an appeal can only be brought

Local Government analysis: The Court of Appeal held that an appeal against an improvement notice under the Housing Act 2004 must be determined by reference to whether the local housing authority was wrong to serve the notice when it did, not by conditions existing at the tribunal hearing. Subsequent remedial works cannot retrospectively invalidate the notice, although later-discovered evidence may be relevant to the correctness of the original decision. The court also confirmed that, when considering unreasonable conduct costs under rule 13 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Property Chamber) Rules 2013, a party may rely on the correct legal position, notwithstanding its failure to appeal the substantive decision. Practitioners should therefore focus appeals on the position at service, while authorities should ensure notices are precise and retain adequate inspection records. Produced in partnership with Clive Adams, partner, and Zach Plunkett, graduate solicitor apprentice of Birketts LLP.

Appeals can be made in respect of most types of planning decisions. The appeal procedure and time limits vary depending on the type of appeal. For information on appeals against decisions relating to planning applications, see Practice Note: Planning appeals. In all cases, it may be advisable before making an appeal to contact the relevant local planning authority (LPA) to discuss the grievance, as the situation may be resolved much more quickly and easily than by taking more formal action. In England, Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) and guidance published by the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) provide advice on appeals against a variety of planning decisions. In Wales, the Welsh government has published a series of guidance notes on the various procedures for appeals against a variety of planning decisions. The government in England and Wales have also published specific guidance for each type of appeals, set out in the relevant categories below. Procedure for appeal In England, section 319A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) gives the Secretary of State the power to

Law360, London: A London appeals court said 9 May 2025 that a fencing company cannot attempt to void a rival's UK design protection because it is a 'clone' of a EU design right that it has already tried to revoke.

Law 360, London: An appeals court on Tuesday, 23 July 2019 upheld the conviction of a British Alstom subsidiary over bribes paid to secure a valuable African infrastructure project, finding that the executives involved in the case did not have to be present for the transportation giant to get a fair trial.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: On an appeal before Mr Justice Zacaroli, the High Court heard a broadly successful appeal founded in large part on a failure of the trial judge to give reasons for their decisions. In summary, the appeal court held that on a number of issues the reasons given by the trial judge had been inadequate such that there would need to be a retrial of large parts of the appellant’s application. However, the court dismissed the appellant’s appeal as regards the adequacy of reasons regarding the judge’s decision on detrimental reliance suffered by the second respondent as well as an appeal against a costs order made in favour of the first respondent. The judgment provides a helpful review of the relevant authorities as well as an example of the practical application of the relevant legal principles. While appeals founded on inadequacies in judicial reasoning are comparatively rare, if the judgment below does not permit the losing party to properly understand the reasons why the judge has found against them, the only recourse may be to appeal on that basis. Written by James Hannant, barrister at Guildhall Chambers.

This Practice Note covers the process for appealing from the EAT, including the usual route of appealing to the Court of Appeal and from there to the Supreme Court plus the leapfrog route of appealing an employment case directly from the EAT to the Supreme Court. For appeals to the Court of Appeal it considers applications for permission, applications for extension of time to appeal, applications for costs and the Practice Guidance on Court of Appeal hear-by dates. In relation to leapfrog appeals to the Supreme Court it covers applications for certificates to the EAT, time limits, applications for costs and the discretion of the Supreme Court. Appeals to the Court of Appeal The usual route of appeal from the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in England and Wales is to the Court of Appeal. This may only be made on a point of law and only with permission, either from the EAT or the Court of Appeal. Except in the case of an appeal from a Rule 3(7ZA) or Rule 3(10) order, an application for permission