This Practice Note explains the solemn procedure in Scottish criminal proceedings. For an explanation of the criminal investigation and prosecution process in Scotland, see Practice Note: The investigation and prosecution of criminal offences in Scotland. For information on the procedure to be followed during trials under the solemn procedure, see Practice Note: Trials under the Scottish solemn procedure and Scottish solemn criminal procedure—flowchart. For guidance on appeal procedures in Scotland for solemn crime, see Practice Note: Scottish criminal appeals—solemn procedure. For an explanation of the summary procedure in Scotland, see Practice Notes: Summary procedure in Scottish criminal proceedings and Scottish solemn criminal procedure—flowchart. Solemn procedure is regulated by the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 (CP(S)A 1995). Modernisation of criminal court procedure Several permanent reforms were introduced by the Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Act 2025. These reforms replaced previous temporary measures introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Practitioners should ensure all procedural references in this Practice Note are read in light of these statutory changes. Electronic

Clinical Negligence Claims Agreement 2024: The Clinical Negligence Claims Agreement 2024 supersedes the COVID-19 Clinical Negligence Protocol (2020) (last updated in June 2021) which was initially created as an emergency measure to adapt clinical negligence claims handling and litigation processes during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The 2024 Agreement builds on the previous Protocol with various practices now adopted into everyday claims management. The Agreement is not contractually binding but places an emphasis on collaborative working between the parties. Introduction This Practice Note provides an overview of the claims procedure in clinical negligence cases following service of the initial statements of case. It is limited to claims allocated to the multi-track. General principles of personal injury law apply, but practitioners must also be aware of the specific considerations applicable to clinical negligence claims. Practitioners should be familiar with the Pre-Action Protocol for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes. See Practice Note: The Pre-Action Protocol for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes—6 April 2015 onwards. Clinical negligence litigation can be complex and lengthy. The court must actively

This Practice Note provides details of the annual employment tribunal (ET) and Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) statistics published by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ). It also includes links to quarterly ET statistics reports. Background The annual employment tribunal and EAT statistics are of interest to employment lawyers for assessing: • any discernible trends in employment litigation • the potential impact of the HMCTS Reform Employment Tribunal Project—see Practice Note: Employment tribunal case management—Employment tribunal reforms • the continuing impact, if any, or the legacy of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic • compensation that might be awarded to successful claimants in different case types, albeit with the need to take into account that: ◦ compensation is highly dependent on the facts and circumstances of each individual case, so compensation awarded in one case does not reflect what would necessarily be awarded in another ◦ the annual statistics do not take into account amounts of compensation agreed between parties in confidential settlements Historically, the MOJ has published: • employment tribunal and EAT statistics on a quarterly

Aggregation—background Aggregation remains a major issue in the settlement of insurance and reinsurance claims leading to a number of disputes across the market. Claims managers, arbitrators and even appellate judges appear to take differing views as to what particular policy wordings are intending to achieve in an aggregation clause. A spate of judicial decisions on the common aggregation wordings in the late 1990s and early 2000s was followed by a quieter period. The last of the litigation arising from the 9/11 tragedy coupled with a spate of solicitors’ and medical negligence claims provided some insight into the modern approach to aggregation. More recently, the wealth of insurance litigation arising out of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic (mostly concerning business interruption losses) has provided an opportunity for the courts to review the relevant principles. What are aggregation clauses? An aggregation clause is a common feature of insurance and reinsurance contracts, which enables two or more separate losses covered by the policy to be treated as a single loss (aggregated) for the purposes of the excess

Clinical Negligence Claims Agreement 2024 The Clinical Negligence Claims Agreement 2024 supersedes the COVID-19 Clinical Negligence Protocol (2020) (last updated in June 2021) which was initially created as an emergency measure to adapt clinical negligence claims handling and litigation processes during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The 2024 agreement builds on the previous Protocol with various practices now adopted into everyday claims management. The agreement is not contractually binding but places an emphasis on collaborative working between the parties. The agreement can be found here: Clinical Negligence Claims Agreement 2024. The claimant is required to request an extension in accordance with the provisions of this agreement in advance of the primary limitation period expiring. In respect of claims where NHSR is the indemnifying organisation and has not yet been notified of the claim, the written notification should be sent to nhsr.limitationnotification@nhs.net. Separate provisions apply, including in respect of limitation, for those not party to or able to benefit from the agreement. For further guidance, see Practice Note: Extending the limitation period in clinical negligence

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. EU and UK regulators have been monitoring the impact of coronavirus (COVID-19) on payment services and systems, with a view to ensuring that consumers can continue to make payments safely throughout the pandemic. The virus has spurred the growth of contactless payments while highlighting issues around access to cash. This Practice Note provides a summary of the impact of coronavirus on payment services and systems in the UK and EU. In the EU, on 25 March 2020, the European Banking Authority (EBA) issued a statement on payment issues in light of coronavirus. Among other things, the EBA called on payments services providers (PSPs) to contribute to measures that limit the spread of coronavirus. In the UK, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) says that it is in regular contact with the industry, the government and other regulators to understand the impact of coronavirus on the payments market. It expects firms to manage the risks to consumers and to provide support

ARCHIVED: This document is archived and is no longer maintained. This Practice Note discusses the implications of the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak for the debt capital markets (DCM) and includes practical tips for DCM lawyers. For regular updates of news and analysis on the outbreak relevant to DCM, see: Practice Note: Coronavirus (COVID-19)—implications for Banking & Finance lawyers—Debt capital markets. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Lawyers across the world have been grappling with many common areas of concern in connection with the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. There are a number of areas that are particularly relevant to banking and finance lawyers. For more detail and analysis on these, see Practice Note: Coronavirus (COVID-19) implications for Banking & Finance lawyers, which is updated regularly with news, practical guidance and analysis covering the impact of COVID-19 developments and covers subject areas such as force majeure in lending transactions and execution of documents as well as setting out the implications for different types of banking and finance lawyers. This Practice Note focuses on the implications for DCM and practical steps

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19): Many arbitral organisations have responded to the coronavirus pandemic with practical guidance and/or changes to their usual procedures and ways of working. Parties using arbitration may designate an arbitral institution, such as the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), to administer the arbitration according to its rules, or proceed ad hoc outside an institutional framework. In ad hoc proceedings, the parties may agree that the ICC act as appointing authority which may include appointing any arbitrator in default of agreement by the parties. It should also be noted that parties may opt for an appointing authority even where the arbitration is proceeding under separate institutional rules. The ICC has specific rules (in force from 1 January 2018) regarding its role as an appointing authority in United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and other arbitration proceedings, including other institutional proceedings (2018 ICC Appointing Authority Rules). Where the ICC is to act as appointing authority in these circumstances,

This Checklist has been archived and is not maintained. CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19): Many arbitral organisations have responded to the coronavirus pandemic with practical guidance and/or changes to their usual procedures and ways of working. For links to guidance on the 2021 ICC Rules (in force 1 January 2021) and the 2012 ICC Rules, see: ICC arbitration—overview. Pre-arbitration Day 0 Day 30 Day 60 If commencing arbitration, the claimant should consider:• the arbitration agreement• any limitation issues• alternative dispute resolution (ADR) provisions A party requiring urgent relief may commence emergency arbitrator proceedings (ICC, App V, art 29), see Practice Note: ICC (2017)—emergency arbitrator proceedings [Archived]A copy of the ICC Arbitration Rules 2017 are available here The claimant’s Request for Arbitration (the Request) will be received by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Secretariat (with filing fee) (ICC, art 4(3))—see Practice Note: ICC (2017)—fees, advances and costs [Archived] The respondent will file the Answer to the Request and any counterclaims within 30 days of notice of Request from

This Practice Note provides a step-by-step process for analysing and invoking a force majeure clause. It must be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Force majeure—consequences and contract discharge. This illustration indicates the steps involved in determining the effective use of a force majeure clause: Stage 1—is there a force majeure clause? There is no legal concept in English law of ‘force majeure’ (contrast this with countries which apply a civil code specifically recognising force majeure, eg France). Therefore if your client wishes to avoid or limit their liability because of an inability to perform caused by an event such as, eg the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic (as was seen in 2020) or the imposition of financial sanctions against Russian entities and individuals/impact of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, then you will need to check that the relevant agreement contains a force majeure clause. For guidance on breaching contractual terms due to financial sanctions more generally, see Practice Note: Statutory controls in contract breach scenarios. As with any contractual clause, how the force

This Practice Note summarises how the common law doctrine of frustration may operate to discharge an agreement and the legal consequences of a contract being frustrated, including issues of partial frustration, party at fault (self-induced frustration) and examples of types of frustrating event. See also Practice Notes: • Frustration event analysis—a practical guide • Frustration—key and illustrative decisions For guidance on drafting a notice asserting frustration of a contract, see Precedent: Contract frustration notice. Interest in the doctrine of frustration particularly came to the fore in light of world events such as the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the attendant imposition of sanctions against Russian entities. The 2026 conflict in the Middle East and Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz will likely result in similar interest in this area, see News Analysis: The Middle East conflict—key legal issues for commercial entities. Links to general guidance with regard to contractual relations and these world events is provided in the world events section below. Frustration is distinct

Civil justice reform: see Practice Note: Civil justice reform in Scotland—virtual hearings and electronic submission of documents for guidance on the current rules and practice in the Scottish civil courts in relation to virtual hearings and the electronic signing, transmission and lodging of documents. In particular, the Act of Sederunt (Electronic Signature and Electronic Transmission of Documents) 2025, SSI 2025/302 came into force on 1 December 2025, making permanent the rules on electronic signatures and electronic transmission/lodging of documents which were introduced during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. This Practice Note offers practical and procedural guidance on ordinary actions proceeding in the Court of Session. For information on: • substantive and procedural matters that should be considered before commencing a civil action in the Scottish courts, including the jurisdiction of the Court of Session, see Practice Note: Starting a civil claim in Scotland • the role of the Court of Session, how it is constituted and the binding nature of its judgments, see Practice Note: Civil court structure