CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 21 September 2012; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and related cases. Case facts Outline UK merger investigation into the completed acquisition by McGill's Bus Services of Arriva Scotland West. The Competition Commission cleared the transaction on 21 September 2012. Latest developments The CC cleared the acquisition unconditionally on 21 September 2012. Parties McGill's Bus Services Limited (McGill's) and Arriva Scotland West (ASW). McGill's is a family owned operator of local commercial

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the cancellation of the investigation on 4 May 2020 after the abandonment of the transaction; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline UK merger investigation into the anticipated acquisition by McGraw Hill Education, Inc of Cengage Holdings II, Inc. The transaction involves horizontal overlaps in the supply of higher education textbooks. Latest developments On 5 May 2020, the CMA formally cancelled its phase 2 investigation after the parties decided to abandon the proposed transaction. Parties • McGraw-Hill Education, Inc (MHE): MEH is a US based company that publishes educational materials. It delivers content, tools and services through digital print, digital and hybrid solutions for pre-nursery, secondary school, college, university and professional learning, and information markets on a worldwide basis. • Cengage Holdings II, In (Cengage): Cengage is a US based company that develops learning solutions. It offers courses for instructor and trainer development, supplementary information, certifications, and online training services. Cengage Learning operates worldwide. Background On

This Practice Note provides guidance on McKenzie friends in family proceedings and the procedure to be followed when a party seeks to be represented by a McKenzie friend, as well as what a McKenzie friend may or may not do. It also considers applications for a McKenzie friend to have rights of audience or the conduct of proceedings. The primary guidance in relation to McKenzie friends was issued on 12 July 2010 by the President of the Family Division (jointly with the Master of the Rolls) (the McKenzie friends guidance). That guidance replaced the earlier President’s guidance issued on 14 October 2008 and encompassed much of the guidance set out in earlier case law. In addition, guidance issued by the Bar Council, the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx) and the Law Society regarding litigants in person was issued in June 2015 and includes generic guidance regarding McKenzie friends (at paras 54 to 74). The Judicial Executive Board (JEB) issued a consultation paper in February 2016 proposing reforms to the existing guidance in relation to McKenzie friends,

Law360, London: Dublin-based lender AIB Group plc said 8 May 2025 it has agreed to repurchase €1.2bn worth of its shares from the Irish state as it moves to further reduce the government's stake from its crisis-era financial bailout.

Law360: The UK's equality watchdog said on 7 November 2025 it has asked McDonald's to do more to protect its staff from sexual harassment after 'serious allegations' emerged following an initial deal with the fast food giant.

TMT analysis: The High Court has determined the meaning of three communications concerning a care home employee which are the subject of defamation claims against her former employer. The meaning attributed to the relevant emails and DBS referral were stronger than those proposed by the defendant but fell short of the claimant’s claim that the publications meant that she had lied.

TMT analysis: The High Court has ruled that ‘The Spider Network,’ a book about the Libor scandal, carried a defamatory meaning in relation to the claimant Panagiotis Koutsogiannis, who had been a trader at UBS during the Libor rigging problems there. The court held that the meaning of the book was that the claimant had deliberately tried to manipulate the Libor rate to the benefit of his own or his employers’ trading position, which was an allegation of fact, not an expression of opinion as argued by the defendant publisher.

Commercial analysis: The Court of Appeal has taken a restrictive interpretation of an express duty of good faith in a decision handed down on 21 October 2022. This decision is important as (i) the Court of Appeal judgment provides a lengthy examination of the meaning of a contractual duty of good faith, and (ii) the decision casts doubt on some previous case law on this point (including overturning the High Court's decision). Neil Brown and Clare Rooney, partner and associate at RPC respectively, analyse this new development.

The concept of ‘damage’ in the insurance context The concept of ‘damage’ plays a critical role in determining the scope of cover provided by various different types of insurance. Common examples of types of insurance policy where recovery is, or can be, contingent on proving damage to property include the following: • marine cargo insurance • construction all risks (CAR) insurance • domestic and commercial property insurance • business interruption cover, especially where this is the counterpart of a traditional property policy • cover for sue and labour or investigation costs under some property policies • liability policies triggered by the legal liability of the insured to a third party for physical damage to their property The precise meaning of ‘damage’ can vary, and it will always be influenced by the context in which the word appears. There is no universal definition which applies in all circumstances; as ever it is essential to construe the word in the context of the particular insurance policy in which it features. The policy

This Practice Note provides a chronology of the main European cases in the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) (formerly ECJ cases) considering the meaning of waste under the Waste Framework Directive 2008 (WFD), including a summary of the key issue, the ruling and how it relates to the definition of waste, waste cases cited and key cases referred to in the decision. For more information on the definition of waste and other key provisions of the WFD, see Practice Note: EU Waste Framework Directive—snapshot. Vessoso and Zanetti 1990 Key issue Whether substances or objects that are capable of economic reutilisation are waste. Ruling Waste does not exclude substances or objects which are capable of economic reutilisation. The concept of waste does not presume that the holder disposing of a substance or object intends to exclude all economic reutilisation of the substance or object by others. Waste cases cited None Key cases referring to this case Commission v Germany 1995; Tombesi; Wallonie; ARCO Chemie; Palin Granit; AvestaPolarit Commission

Definition of Waste 'Waste' is defined as ‘any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard’. This definition comes from the Waste Framework Directive, Directive 2008/98/EC (WFD) and is implemented in England and Wales through domestic legislation. For more information, see also Practice Note: Meaning of waste—what is waste? Relevant legislation The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011, SI 2011/988 transposed the requirements of the WFD into domestic law. The Waste (Circular Economy) (Amendment) Regulations 2020, SI 2020/904 made legislative changes required to transpose the 2020 Circular Economy Package (CEP) measures on behalf of England and Wales, and associated amendments to WFD, which included updates to ‘end of waste’ criteria. Interpretation The meaning of ‘discard’ is interpreted through case law. Waste must not be interpreted restrictively. It is interpreted: • widely in light of all the circumstances • having regard to the aims of the directive, eg to protect human health and the environment against

The Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011, SI 2011/988 transposed the Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC (WFD) as amended in 2018 (WFD) into domestic law. Predecessor Directives were implemented through various Acts and Regulations, including the following: • the Environmental Protection Act 1990, particularly section 34 dealing with the ‘duty of care’ on those responsible for waste • the Control of Pollution (Amendment) Act 1989 and the Controlled Waste (Registration of Carriers and Seizure of Vehicles) Regulations 1991, SI 1991/1624, dealing with the registration of waste carriers • the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016, SI 2016/1154, dealing with permitting of waste disposal and recovery operations • the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2005, SI 2005/894 and the Hazardous Waste (Wales) Regulations 2005, SI 2005/1806 (W.138), and Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2016, SI 2016/336 dealing with hazardous waste and • the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and subordinate legislation made under those