The Crown Commercial Service (CCS) launched the RM6190 Technology Services 4 framework on 12 December 2025, replacing the RM6100 Technology Services 3 framework, which expires in March 2026. The new framework, which will run for up to 8 years, is largest of its kind in the public sector, incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) and automation as ancillary services to help enhance digital services in the public sector. Let under the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023), the framework aims to facilitate more flexible procurement of technology services, including service and architecture design, end user support, IT infrastructure, app development, data and transformation services. Key updates include simpler procurement terms, removal of maximum call off terms and supplier limits, and the ability for customers to procure services from two lots in one exercise. Contract terms have been revised to address feedback relating to intellectual property rights, insurance limits and liability arrangements, with potential cost savings of up to 20% compared to current market rates.

The Scottish Building Contracts Committee (SBCC) has announced undergoing updates on the SBCC 2024 Edition, confirming that it is adapting the JCT 2024 suites for Scotland with a focus on modernising and streamlining, future proofing updates, and legislative changes affecting Scotland. It stated that the SBCC 2024 Minor Works suite—comprising three main contracts, two sub‑contracts, administration forms and tracked‑change documents—is nearing completion and expected to be available by the end of February 2026, with online launch events to follow. The SBCC added that further Design and Build and Standard Building Contract suites are expected between Spring and Autumn 2026, with remaining suites released later in 2026 and into 2027, and advised continued use of current SBCC editions, mainly 2016, until the 2024 versions are published.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has found that the Cabinet Office has failed to demonstrate effective management of the outsourced administration of the Civil Service Pension Scheme, which covers 1.7 million members and liabilities of £189bn. The report identified persistently poor customer service under current administrator MyCSP, long delays in remedying age discrimination affecting thousands of pensioners, and serious risks to the transition of administration to Capita in December 2025, with key milestones already missed. It criticised the Cabinet Office’s weak contract oversight, limited enforcement of performance standards, and inadequate planning to ensure sufficient staffing and continuity of service. The PAC further raised concerns about the lack of union recognition during staff transfers, a restricted supplier market limiting value for money, and the absence of a clear strategy for future pension administration, recommending that the government consider bringing the scheme back in-house to safeguard service quality and accountability.

The Japan Commercial Arbitration Association (JCAA) has announced its upcoming free online webinar on 23 January 2025, focusing on creating dispute-resilient contracts for businesses operating in China. The seminar will address the complexities of the Chinese market, including economic challenges, data regulations, and security concerns. Key topics include the purpose of contracts, China-specific considerations, negotiation strategies, and recent developments in dispute resolution clauses. The webinar will cover critical aspects of Chinese contract law, including licensing regulations, the Civil Code, CISG application, and restrictions on choice of law. Speakers with extensive experience in Chinese law and business practices will provide insights on typical contracts such as technology licensing, agency, equity transfer, and joint venture agreements.

The Cabinet Office has updated Procurement Policy Note 006: Taking account of Carbon Reduction Plans in the procurement of major government contracts (PPN 006). PPN 006 sets out the requirements for UK government departments and in-scope organisations to take account of Carbon Reduction Plans in the procurement of major contracts (with an estimated contract value above £5 million per year). As part of assessing a supplier’s technical ability, in-scope organisations should include as a condition of participation a requirement for bidding suppliers to submit a Carbon Reduction Plan (using a set format). Carbon Reduction Plans must meet the reporting standard set out in the supporting guidance to PPN 006 and include details of the supplier’s carbon footprint and its commitment to reducing emissions to achieve net zero by 2050. PPN 006 was first issued in February 2025. It has been updated to include the Carbon Reduction Plan Template in an Open Document Format (ODF).

Ofgem has published a decision, announcing modifications to the Smart Meter Communication Licence as part of its ongoing review of the regulatory framework for the Data Communications Company (DCC), ahead of the licence’s expiry in 2027. The decision follows Ofgem’s statutory consultation published in May 2025 and aims to support Ofgem’s policy conclusions on the transition to a new cost control regime, while supporting the administration of the final Price Control at the end of the licence term. Key modifications include: (1) implementing the ex-ante process for determining DCC’s Allowed Revenue under the Successor Licence; (2) amending dates for certain reporting requirements, including the Price Control submission, to align with the Transfer Date; (3) amending the Baseline Margin Adjustment and External Contract Gain Share mechanisms; and (4) making minor technical and housekeeping changes.

This week’s edition of Public Law weekly highlights includes a hand-picked summary of news analysis, legal updates and case law from the world of Public Law. These highlights include the latest updates on public procurement, constitutional and administrative law, judicial review, information law, Brexit, State aid and subsidy control, and new and updated content. This edition features Apasen Ltd v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council, a Technology and Construction Court decision on set aside under the Procurement Act 2023 and the accuracy of contract award notices. It also includes R (Cunningham) v Secretary of State for Justice, on X-ray body scanner policies in prisons, R (Hewitson) v Parole Board for England and Wales, on oral hearing fairness in Parole Board decisions, and Armstrong v Information Commissioner, on Freedom of Information Act 2000 procedure, tribunal jurisdiction and the public interest test. Further updates include the Cabinet Office’s phased modernisation of the Find a Tender Service and the Public Office (Accountability) Bill.

This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes a High Court decision confirming the limited scope for judicial review in relation to decisions made in connection with the Developer Remediation Contract (Rydon Group v SSLUHC), a First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decision on the classification of accountable person under the Building Safety Act 2022 (Clarion v Globe), updated guidance from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) on the submission of mandatory occurrence notices and reports, the Scottish Property Federation (SPF)’s response to the Scottish Government's Building Safety Levy September 2024, a case providing guidance from the Scottish court on collateral warranties and timebars (Legal and General v Halliday Fraser Munro) and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS)’s publication of the first global standard on AI use in surveying.

This Agreement is made on [insert day and month] 20[insert year] Parties 1 [insert selling corporate entity] incorporated in England and Wales under number [insert company number] whose registered office is at [insert address] (the Seller), [and] 2 [insert name of purchasing corporate entity] incorporated in England and Wales under number [insert company number] whose registered office is at [insert address] (the Buyer), [and] the Seller and the Buyer being a Party and together the Seller and the Buyer are the Parties. background (A) The Parties propose to enter into negotiations concerning the Proposed Acquisition. (B) In order to explore, discuss, evaluate and negotiate the Proposed Acquisition, the Buyer has requested that certain Confidential Information [(and Personal Data) ]be made available to it in order to evaluate the Business and to consider and negotiate the terms of the Proposed Acquisition. (C) The Parties have agreed to enter into this Agreement in consideration of the Seller disclosing and the Buyer receiving the Confidential Information. The parties agree: 1 Definitions and interpretation 1.1 In this Agreement, unless otherwise provided: Authorised Person • means any employee, director, consultant, agent, representative or adviser of the Buyer

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision in R v Waya, section 6(5) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002) was amended so as to add the words: ‘Paragraph (b) applies only if, or to the extent that, it would not be disproportionate to require the defendant to pay the recoverable amount.’ This gave statutory footing to the principle that confiscation orders must be proportionate. The prosecutor has no obligation to institute confiscation proceedings but instead has a discretion to do so. If the prosecutor does not ask the court to proceed to confiscation, the court also retains a discretion whether or not to embark upon confiscation proceedings (providing all the other statutory conditions have been met). It is clear from the judgment in R v Andrewes that prosecutors, at least, should factor an assessment of proportionality into their decision on whether or not to ask the court to proceed to confiscation. See News Analysis: Ensuring proportionality in confiscation proceedings (R v Andrewes). There are no statutory

Arbitration analysis: In a ruling handed down by the Norwegian Supreme Court on 30 March 2023, the court held that an insurance company seeking recourse against a supplier was bound by an arbitration clause between the supplier and the insured party. The lawsuit brought by the insurance company was therefore dismissed by the ordinary courts. The ruling reinforces the effectiveness of arbitration agreements, not only in relation to insurance companies, but to third parties in general. Following the ruling, it is now established that if a claim is transferred to a third party, disputes concerning the claim will be subject to arbitration even if the entire contract or legal relationship is not transferred. The ruling may be of some concern to insurance companies or other third parties who do not wish to resolve their disputes through arbitration. Written by Knud Jacob Knudsen, partner at Simonsen Vogt Wiig.

Arbitration analysis: In Sian Participation v Halimeda, the Privy Council held that the Salford-approach should be abolished. Even if the underlying debt is subject to an arbitration clause or exclusive jurisdiction clause, the creditor can apply to have the debtor company wound up if the debtor company cannot demonstrate that the debt is disputed on genuine substantial grounds. The existence of the choice of forum clause in the underlying contract does not alter the ordinary threshold test to be applied. While this is an appeal from the BVI, the Board also gave a Willers v Joyce direction holding that the approach in Salford Estates should not be followed by the courts of England and Wales thereby putting an end to the current practice of the Companies Court to stay or dismiss a creditors’ winding up petition on the ground that the petitioner’s debt is covered by an arbitration clause. Written by Ernest Leung, barrister at Wilberforce Chambers.