A single manager is responsible for several asset classes and is measured against a peer group or customised benchmark which specifies a fixed asset allocation. (The manager may or may not have discretion to vary the allocation around this benchmark.)

Employment analysis: In the context of a large scale multi-claimant equal pay claim against the supermarket Asda, an Employment Judge was entitled to (a) order that solicitors representing a group of claimants whose claims were stayed pending the resolution of the sample claims in the Brierley litigation were entitled to attend all private hearings in that case and receive the hearing bundles, and (b) refuse to make an order that those solicitors should be provided with all correspondence and documents passing between the parties in the Brierley litigation. It is inherent in this kind of litigation that absolute equality between all claimants is not possible, according to the EAT.

What is multi-contracting? Multi-contracting is a procurement option that involves a number of contractors being engaged separately in respect of the various work packages that comprise a project—they are engaged directly by the employer to deliver those separate work packages. This form of procurement is commonly used in relation to energy projects (power plants, wind farms etc) as an alternative to using an EPC contract structure (see also Practice Note: EPC, split EPC and multi-party contract projects). The employer will co-ordinate all the works packages and manage the interface between them. This diagram illustrates the contractual structure of a project procured using the multi-contract route (this structure may change from project to project, although the diagram details the contractual matrix): The contractors are typically employed on target cost contracts. This contractual structure is suited to projects where the employer is the most appropriate party to bear some of the project specific risks and the risks associated with the interfaces between the various contractors. Multi-contracting is best suited to experienced employers who are comfortable retaining a greater degree of risk

Multi-contracting involves a number of contractors who are each engaged separately, and directly, by the employer to deal with separate elements of the work.

A Multi-disciplinary practice is a type of business which combines legal services with others such as accountancy or estate agency.

This is the term commonly used in the USA to describe their apartment investment market

Arbitration analysis: The Commercial Court has dismissed proceedings brought by Tumpuan Megah Development (TMD) against OW Bunker Far East (OWB) and ING Bank (ING), finding that the claim was precluded by findings in a previous LMAA arbitral award between the parties. In doing so, the court emphatically confirmed that, so long as an arbitral award remains unchallenged, it will have preclusive effect on later proceedings that seek to set up a factual case inconsistent with its conclusions. It did not matter that there were foreign proceedings underway in relation to that award or that there may yet have been a challenge to the award’s validity in a subsequent action for recognition or enforcement. The decision is a helpful guide to the circumstances in which the findings in an arbitral award can be re-opened in later litigation by the unsuccessful party, and what that party can do to avoid the preclusive effect of an adverse award. Written by Can Yeginsu, barrister and arbitrator at 3 Verulam Buildings.

This grid summarises when foreign direct investment (FDI) filings may be required in selected jurisdictions in the world, and also indicates whether such filings are mandatory and whether closing should be suspended pending clearance. Note—more jurisdictions will be added in due course, and further information on each regime will also be summarised in due course. Jurisdiction Thresholds for FDI review Mandatory and suspensory regime? Deadline for investigation Penalties for failing to notify/closing before clearance Andorra Acquisition by a foreign investor of more than 10% of the share capital or voting rights in an Andorran company, or the acquisition of controlNOTE• the regime applies broadly across sectors and is not limited to national security or ‘sensitive’ sectors• investments of 10% or less are generally subject to a declaration requirement only Notification is mandatory and closing to be suspended pending clearance One month (extendable if additional information is requested or application is incomplete) Fines may be imposed and transactions may be declared null and void (with potential obligation to unwind) Angola No thresholds; rather, all private investments are subject

This is a news feed that tracks and summarises key legislative and policy developments in relation to foreign direct investment (FDI) regimes in jurisdictions throughout the world. For specific details of FDI rules around the world, see further, Multi-jurisdictional FDI guides. 2026 Date Jurisdiction Development 13/10/2026 EU • The Commission publishes the sixth annual report on the screening of FDI into the EU 16/07/2026 EU Regulation (EU) 2026/1386 enters into force. It will generally apply from 17/01/2028, when Regulation (EU) 2019/452 is repealed, subject to transitional arrangements; specified provisions apply from 16/07/2026 26/06/2026 EU • The EU publishes its updated rules on FDI; the updated FDI regulation will enter into force 20 days after its publication today in the Official Journal 12/06/2026 Switzerland • The Federal Council launches a consultation on the Investment Screening Ordinance, which sets out the implementing provisions for the Swiss Federal Act on the Review of Foreign Investments, adopted by the Parliament on 19/12/2025 08/06/2026 Netherlands • The Dutch government announced that six additional technology categories will be brought within the scope of the Netherlands’ foreign investment

This Practice Note is a template for a typical initial request for information (RFI) to conduct a multi-jurisdictional merger control analysis and a preliminary antitrust risk assessment. The RFI assumes an acquisition by one company ([Company 1]) of another ([Company 2]). It should be adapted to reflect the transaction structure and the parties’ activities. It also assumes that [Company 1] manufactures products; references to products should be adapted where the parties supply services. It is advisable that a similar RFI is sent to the other party through its own competition counsel. Before competitively sensitive information is exchanged between the parties, appropriate confidentiality and/or clean team arrangements should be put in place. Any inter-party exchange of competitively sensitive information should be coordinated through each party’s competition counsel. For an example precedent, see Clean team agreement. Note—this RFI is intended as an initial request. Targeted follow-up requests will usually be required once the potential filing jurisdictions, horizontal overlaps, vertical relationships, and other competitive interactions have been identified. Separate information requests may also be required for

In today’s global economy, patent proprietors may find it necessary or desirable to enforce their patent rights in multiple countries. This Practice Note details key considerations for developing and implementing a global patent litigation strategy, including identifying countries of interest, potential defendants, and relevant patents, and then assessing the legal framework in each country of interest in light of the patent proprietor’s overall litigation goals. Identify countries of interest and potential defendants When developing a global patent litigation strategy, a patent proprietor (and/or its legal advisors) should first identify potential countries in which it wants to protect its rights, either through maintaining product exclusivity or patent licensing (or a mix of both). Patentees should consider countries where: • they use or contemplate using their patented technology (ie technology that is covered by one or more of their patents in a particular country) • potential defendants (ie alleged infringers or prospective licensees that currently use or may in the future use the patented technology) These considerations and others are discussed in further detail below. Countries of interest based on

Produced in association with 4 Pump Court This Practice Note considers whether it is possible to have an adjudication between three or more parties (known as multi-party adjudication), for example if an employer wishes to adjudicate in relation to a defect that was caused by a contractor and a consultant. Adjudication is not a procedure well suited to multi-party disputes—dealing with submissions from two parties within a 28-day timeframe is often challenging enough, without adding in a further layer of complication (particularly if the two responding parties need to reply to arguments from each other, as well as the referring party). As such, most adjudication regimes, and the Scheme for Construction Contracts, do not contemplate multi-party adjudications. For guidance on which common adjudication rules and standard form contracts permit multi-party disputes, see Practice Note: Introduction to adjudication clauses and procedures. There are, however, contractual schemes purporting to allow non-parties to be joined in an adjudication under that contract. The difficulty in principle with this approach is that it is not easy to see how an adjudication