This Practice Note considers the position on arrestment in Scotland. For guidance on: • other forms of diligence in Scottish civil procedure, see Practice Note: Enforcement in Scottish civil litigation which, in turn, links through to detailed guidance on a number of forms of diligence available in Scotland • the equivalent in England and Wales, see: Introduction to enforcement—overview which, as well as giving an overview of this topic, links through to more detailed guidance on various aspects of domestic enforcement in England and Wales • cross-border enforcement, see Practice Note: Cross-border enforcement—a guide for dispute resolution practitioners which, as well as giving an overview of this topic, links through to more detailed guidance on various aspects of cross-border enforcement In 2020, the Scottish Government began a policy review of diligence measures in Scotland and this led to the Bankruptcy and Diligence (Scotland) Act 2024, which received Royal Assent on 15 July 2025. See Practice Note: Enforcement in Scottish civil litigation—Methods of enforcement in Scotland for details. Key: • BD(S)A 2024—Bankruptcy

Local Government analysis: In late February 2021 a news article reported that a care home worker had been arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter after a patient died of coronavirus (COVID-19). In late March 2021, two further care home workers were arrested on suspicion of wilful neglect. Jonathan Grimes and Sophie Wood of Kingsley Napley LLP look at how those working in care homes can potentially face criminal liability in respect of coronavirus cases.

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 2 November 2016; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline, commentary and related cases. Case facts Outline UK merger investigation into the completed acquisition by Arriva Rail North Limited of the Northern Rail franchise. The transaction involves a horizontal overlaps in rail routes in northern England. Latest developments On 2 November 2016, the CMA issued its final report and cleared the transaction subject to remedies. The CMA has found that the transaction may be expected to lead to a SLC in relation to three rail routes (Leeds to Sheffield, Wakefield to Sheffield and Chester to Manchester). Following further evidence submitted since the provisional findings, the CMA determined that there are no competition concerns on other rail routes and on routes where Arriva’s bus services overlap with Northern rail franchise routes. To remedy those concerns, the CMA has ordered targeted local remedies comprising caps on unregulated rail fares for the affected routes.  Parties Arriva Rail North Limited (ARN) is a

Arrêté relatif aux Installations Nucléaires de Base (French decree relative to the design, construction, operation, shutdown, decommissioning, maintaining and surveillance of basic nuclear installations).

Law360, London: Two Premier League clubs have hammered out a settlement with their insurers over a multimillion-pound lawsuit on coronavirus (COVID-19) business interruption claims.

Arson refers in practice to the deliberate or reckless setting of fire to property, usually with intent to damage, endanger life, or defraud. It is a serious offence attracting custodial sentences and often arises in criminal, insurance and civil liability contexts. In England and Wales, “arson” is not a standalone statutory label but commonly describes criminal damage by fire under the Criminal Damage Act 1971, including aggravated arson where life is endangered. Case law and charging practice use “arson” to distinguish fire‑related criminal damage from other forms. In Scotland, arson is not a technical term; equivalent conduct is prosecuted mainly as wilful fire‑raising or culpable and reckless fire‑raising at common law, with different levels of seriousness depending on risk to life and extent of damage. In Northern Ireland, arson is generally charged under provisions corresponding to the Criminal Damage Act 1971, and the term is used similarly to England and Wales. In Ireland, arson is primarily governed by the Criminal Damage Act 1991, which criminalises damaging property by fire and creating risk to life. Across all jurisdictions, issues of intent, recklessness, endangerment of life, insurance fraud, and evidential complexity (e.g. expert fire investigation) are central.

Arson Damage to property caused by fire is charged as arson. A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another by fire, intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged, shall be guilty of the offence of arson under section 1(3) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 (CDA 1971). For information on criminal damage, see Practice Note: Criminal damage. In R v Booth arson was not specified in the charge and the court ruled the indictment a nullity. The court revisited this issue in R v Drayton, ruling that the allegation must at least be identified as 'damage by fire' so that the defendant has no doubt that the allegation is one of fire damage, which has a more severe penalty than other simple criminal damage. Simple arson, where life is not endangered, is triable either way. Where the criminal damage forming the basis of the charge is 'significant damage by fire' then a Crown Court trial is appropriate

‘The attribution of works of art to particular artists is often a matter of great controversy’ (per Sir Raymond Evershed MR). The value of the art market continues to grow, and the attribution of a work to a particular individual can have a dramatic impact on its sale price. As Jordan Holland, a barrister involved in the art law area has said in an article on this subject: ‘ … a desirable attribution has the capacity to raise the price of a piece from tens of thousands of pounds to tens of millions of pounds. When this is taken together with the influx of new collectors, buyers and art investors into the market it is hardly surprising that the court is being asked to consider the attribution of art and cultural property on an increasingly frequent basis. In doing so, it is required to answer questions which are different from those with which it is usually faced’. See: The approach of the English court to connoisseurship, provenance and technical

Issues relating to bailment can arise in art contexts. For example, a warehouse or shipping company may owe bailment duties when storing and/or transporting chattels or artworks. Loans and/or the use of artworks as security or collateral may give rise to bailments. Frequently, claims which are rooted in breach of contract and/or negligence will also plead bailment. Further examples are included throughout this Practice Note. Bailment is a complex area. This Practice Note focuses on bailment issues as they relate to art law. For a detailed overview of the law of bailment generally, see Practice Note: Bailment. See also Q&A: How are damages quantified when bailed goods have been negligently lost? For a summary of relevant aspects of art law relevant to Private Client practitioners, see Practice Note: Art law—introduction for Private Client practitioners. What is bailment? In simple terms, a bailment can arise in common law when one party takes temporary possession of a second party’s goods, such as: • a collector, known as the bailor, gives an artwork or chattel to a second party, known as the bailee

Introduction to the art market and art law There have been considerable changes to the art market in the last 30 years: • the main centres are now London, New York and Hong Kong, with Paris being the fourth largest art centre and national markets for lower priced art and collectibles • the market has become increasingly anonymous • prices for iconic artworks have become stratospheric—Salvator Mundi by Leonardo da Vinci was sold for $450.3 million in 2017 and in 2025, Gustav Klimt’s Portrait of Elisabeth Lederer sold for $236.4 million at Sotheby's • the main auction houses have become ever more powerful • art advisers are retained to do due diligence, open doors and guide collectors through the process, but are not always suitably qualified • the last 25 years have seen the birth of ‘mega’ art fairs which appear roughly every four months around the globe • art is increasingly seen as an asset class—and promoted as an investment by auction classes • in the increasingly global market lawyers working with art collectors, businesses and not-for-profit

This Practice Note considers negligence and contractual claims against auction houses and valuers in relation to artworks. The Practice Note focuses on four cases, highlighting the ways in which the courts have addressed issues relating to: (a) the attribution of artwork (see Practice Note: Art law—authenticity, provenance and attribution of artworks), (b) the duty and standard of care in such cases and (c) the quantification of damages. It should be noted that claims in negligence relating to objects of art are highly fact specific, and that the area is a complex one in legal, evidential and other relevant terms. This Practice Note is necessarily an overview summary of certain key aspects, specialist advice to consider the complexities at the earliest possible stage will nearly always be advisable. For an introduction to art law for Private Client practitioners, see Practice Note: Art law—introduction for Private Client practitioners. For an overview of the general principles applicable in negligence claims, as to the existence and standard of duty of care, breach, causation and loss, see Practice Note: Negligence claims—illustrative decisions

For an introduction to art law for Private Client practitioners, see Practice Note: Art law—introduction for Private Client practitioners. Restitution is a complex area. For a detailed overview of the general law in England and Wales, see: Unjust enrichment and restitution—overview. This Practice Note deals with restitution in an art law context. While it focuses on the issue from the perspective of English law, the Practice Note covers some of the key issues in restitution. Given that this area is international in scope, evolving all the time and involves disparate ethical and public policy considerations, this introductory Practice Note seeks simply to outline some of the key features without examining all of the elements or complexities involved. Restitution in art cases Historical context One of the unfortunate effects of war is that it results in large scale looting and plundering of the areas involved in the conflict. Historically it was believed that the victors had a right to appropriate cultural and artistic items–a so-called ‘prize right’. Article 56 of the Hague Regulations on the Laws and Customs of War on Land