The Private Finance Initiative (PFI) is a public private partnership model that was introduced in 1992, and was then succeeded by ‘PF2’ in 2012. See Practice Notes: Introduction to PFI and PF2, Key parties in a PFI/PF2 project and PFI structure—diagram. This Practice Note looks primarily at disputes on PFI projects (as opposed to those in relation to PF2), given that there are significantly more PFI projects. In 2018, it was announced that the government would no longer use the PF2 model on new projects. However, existing PFI and PF2 projects will continue to run. As a result of the typical lifespan of such projects (25–30 years), existing projects, and disputes that arise on them, will likely continue for some years to come. The contractual context of PFI disputes It is not uncommon for disputes to arise on PFI projects—the contracts that govern such projects are extensive and the projects themselves are high-value and complex, and involve a number of interested parties. PFI projects broadly consist of three phases—procurement, construction and operation/maintenance (O&M). Disputes may arise in any of these

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes: analysis of a number of key DR developments and key judicial decisions including that of the Court of Appeal in Cuciurean v Secretary of State for Transport (injunctions), Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority v Azima (admissibility of evidence), Morley v RBS (duty of care and economic duress) and Begum v Maran (duty of care for third party actions); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.

This week's edition of Commercial weekly highlights includes: an announcement that the Supreme Court has granted permission to appeal in MSC Mediterranean Shipping Co SA v Stolt Tank Containers BV & Ors which considered whether a claim to limit liability fell within the scope of art 2 of the 1976 Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims, analysis of the decision in Innovate Pharmaceuticals Ltd v University of Portsmouth Higher Education Corp which considered the question of exclusion and limitation clauses and fraud, and news of the publication of the updated UK Conformity Assessed marking guidance which includes information on the government’s intention to legislate to continue recognition of the European conformity marking.

This week's edition of Property weekly highlights includes: Autumn Budget 2024 and cases on the right to manage, transactions defrauding creditors and stamp duty land tax.

This Practice Note provides a high level oversight of the key issues for consideration in commercial cross-border disputes. A cross-border dispute is a dispute involving parties, assets, events or legal issues connected with more than one country. Cross-border disputes require a structured strategy from the outset. They are rarely confined to the merits of the claim. They usually involve questions of applicable law, jurisdiction, service, evidence, interim relief, enforcement, sanctions, insurance and commercial leverage. Successful cross-border litigation depends on identifying the optimal/most realistic route for success and planning carefully how to get there. A failure to get things right can take time/hold things up which can have repercussions. A cross-border dispute should be assessed as an enforcement and risk management exercise from the start, not only as a litigation or arbitration problem. This is particularly important where the dispute arises from geopolitical disruption, supply chain interference, sanctions exposure, regulatory overlap or assets located in more than one jurisdiction. This Practice Note sets out the main principles that practitioners should consider at the outset

The simplest form of a commercial letter of credit is an undertaking by a bank to pay the beneficiary of the letter of credit a specific sum within a specified time limit against the presentation of specific documents (eg the shipping documents of the goods being sold to the buyer) in accordance with the terms of the letter of credit. A commercial letter of credit can take the form of: • an unconfirmed letter of credit—which usually involves an issuing bank and an advising bank, or • a confirmed letter of credit—which involves an issuing bank and an advising bank which is also a confirming bank Each party in a commercial letter of credit transaction has different rights and responsibilities. For more information on commercial letters of credit in general, see Practice Notes: • Characteristics of commercial letters of credit, and • Types of commercial letters of credit Key parties to a typical commercial letter of credit transaction • Applicant—the applicant is the party who requests that the letter of credit

This Practice Note explains choice of court agreements, as set out in Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast). It covers a range of issues such as derogation, when Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) does not apply, the effect on non-EU parties and the requirements for a valid choice of court agreement. This Practice Note includes discussion of the application of Article 25 to the UK as a non-EU Member State (or a third state as they are often known) following its departure from the EU (subject to the application of transitional provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement). For general guidance on the application of this article to third states, as well as the other provisions of the regulation that are relevant to third states, namely Articles 18(1), 21(2), 24, 26, 33 and 34 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), see Practice Note: Brussels I (recast)—application to third states [Archived]. Note, there are provisions for trust instruments within Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels

Arbitration analysis: In its decision of 21 October 2025, the Paris Court of Appeal ruled on the annulment of an arbitral award in which the arbitral tribunal had declined jurisdiction. The court recalled the well-known principles of French arbitration law regarding consent to arbitration, usually found in an arbitration agreement, which in the matter of international arbitration is not subject to any formal requirements, is independent from the contract in which it is contained (directly of by reference) and the existence and scope of which is assessed without the need to have regard to any state law. The court also clearly stated the method to be followed when ruling on the annulment of an award on the ground of Article 1520 1 of the French Code of Civil Procedure (ie the case when the arbitral tribunal wrongly upheld or declined jurisdiction) which does not relate to the merits of the case but rather consists in a full review of all legal and factual elements that are relevant to establish the existence and scope of the arbitration agreement. This decision can serve as a guide to parties before and after the conclusion of their contract to support the choice of Paris as the place of arbitration, which is a way to ensure: first, that they shall not be placed in the hands of an arbitral tribunal that would retain or decline its jurisdiction for no valid reason, second, that the existence and scope of the arbitration agreement will not be dependent upon a debate as to the determination of the law governing the arbitration agreement and its content, because pursuant to a material rule of French arbitration law, the arbitration agreement is not dependant from any state law, and third, that their decision to resort to arbitration will be given effect. Finally, both the rigor of the method followed by the Court and the magnitude of the litigation costs to be borne by the losing party should deter parties from engaging in frivolous proceedings. Written by Christophe Dugué, Avocat—independent arbitrator and counsel in international commercial arbitration cases, in English and French.

This week’s edition of Employment weekly highlights includes: (1) a Private Members’ Bill transferring the functions of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education to the Secretary of State, ahead of its replacement by Skills England, (2) an analysis of the key changes to the Investment Associations updated Principles of Remuneration, (3) the government response to the consultation on seafarers’ wage regulations and guidance, together with the finalised Seafarer’s Wages Regulations 2024 and further regulations bringing the remaining provisions of the Seafarers’ Wages Act 2023 into force, (4) the new Office for Equality and Opportunity which replaces the Equality Hub, (5) a Private Members’ Bill that would amend the definition of still-birth to apply from 20 weeks into a pregnancy, (6) confirmation that HMRC will administer the new statutory neonatal care pay from April 2025, (7) the adoption of the Platform Work Directive by the Council of the EU, (8) the latest data from the Home Office register of licenced sponsors list, (9) the IRLR Highlights for November 2024, (10) dates for your diary, (11) new Q&As, and (12) updates to our consultation and legislation trackers and horizon scanner.

This week’s edition of Employment weekly highlights includes: (1) commentary from Neil Todd at Thompsons Solicitors, Jonathan Chamberlain and Connie Cliff at Gowling WLG, Philip Harman and Joanne Bell at DAC Beachcroft and Charlotte Gunn at Stevens & Bolton on the Supreme Court’s decision in the Tesco ‘fire and rehire’ case, (2) employment law developments to watch out for in 2024, (3) a report from the IFS suggesting policy changes to increase pension accumulation for employees, (4) a Supreme Court decision on the status of part-time football referees for tax purposes, (5) a Scottish employment tribunal decision granting a declaration (being the only remedy sought) that a refusal by the employer to allow the claimant to work from home full-time discriminated against them as a disabled person because this was a failure to make a reasonable adjustment, (6) a CIPD report on how employers are tackling bullying and harassment at work, (7) a €290m fine for Uber for unauthorised data transfers to the US, (8) the European Commission’s consultation on new standard contractual clauses (SCCs) for transferring personal data to third-country controllers and processors subject to EU GDPR, (9) dates for your diary, (10) updates to our case tracker and horizon scanner, and (11) new Q&As.

This edition of Employment weekly highlights includes: (1) the government’s proposal to drop legislation that would give workers the right to request a more predictable working pattern in favour of a stronger contractual right to the hours they usually work, (2) a Trades Union Congress (TUC) report on zero-hours contracts, (3) an Upper-tier Tribunal decision on the IR35 tax legislation, (4) the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s (EHRC) action plan for Pontins, (5) the EHRC toolkit to prevent sexual harassment in the music industry, (6) a Bar Standards Board consultation on changes to its equality rules, (7) a report from Carers UK calling for a new right to paid carer’s leave, (8) a consultation on changing data protection fees payable to the Information Commissioner’s Office, (9) dates for your diary, (10) updates to our case and consultation trackers and our horizon scanner, and (11) a new Q&A.

This Practice Note includes a link to the full text of key legislation that is particularly relevant to Scotland and referenced in within the practical guidance accessible in the Scotland collection. Scotland Act 1998 Click here for the full text: Scotland Act 1998 (SA 1998). Scotland Act 2012 Click here for the full text: Scotland Act 2012 (SA 2012). Scotland Act 2016 Click here for the full text: Scotland Act 2016 (SA 2016). Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Act 2025 Click here for the full text: Scottish Elections (Representation and Reform) Act 2025 (SE(RR)A 2025). Human Rights Act 1998 Click here for the full text: Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998). Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 Click here for the full text: