This Practice Note looks at the key definitions and terms used to describe platform solutions and gives an explanation of the common types of platform and terms associated with them. It also includes an explanation of the definitions in each of the key pieces of legislation in the UK and the EU which is used to determine the entities caught within the scope of that legislation. Detailed consideration of electronic data interchanges or other platforms used to facilitate the computer-to-computer exchange of business or trading data and documentation is beyond the scope of this Practice Note. Online platforms Online platforms have experienced significant growth in both economic and societal importance, with public and political debate about their responsibilities and liabilities reaching unprecedented levels. They have penetrated retail markets and communications networks, which has changed the way in which goods and services are bought and sold, as well as facilitating richer, content-driven forms of social interaction and networking. Online platforms have taken on a pivotal role in the shift from the offline world to the online environment, enabling

This Practice Note provides guidance on making an application for an order under section 8 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989), or an application for permission to apply for a section 8 order, using the online service and the pilot schemes in place under the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, in relation to private law children proceedings by virtue of FPR 2010, PD 36G (Pilot Scheme: Procedure for using an online system to generate applications in certain private law proceedings relating to children) and FPR 2010, PD 36ZD: Pilot Scheme: Online system for certain private law proceedings relating to children and for certain protective orders. The pilot schemes apply within the time periods set out in the pilots (as amended). Modifications to aspects of FPR 2010 that apply to cases dealt with under the pilot schemes are also detailed. FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 36.2 makes provision for Practice Directions to modify or disapply any provision of FPR 2010 for specified periods and in relation to proceedings in specified courts during the operation

This Practice Note provides guidance on provision in place under the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010) in relation to online public law children, adoption and placement proceedings, including FPR 2010, PD 41D (Proceedings by electronic means: public law proceedings and emergency proceedings relating to children) (from 1 November 2022), FPR 2010, PD 41E (Procedure for using an online system to complete and file certain applications for an adoption order) (from 18 May 2023), FPR 2010, PD 41F (Proceedings by electronic means: placement proceedings) (from 1 April 2024), the transitional provision in FPR 2010, PD 36P (Pilot scheme: placement proceedings: procedure for specified steps to be taken via the online system) applicable to certain proceedings issued before 1 April 2024, and the pilot provision in FPR 2010, PD 36ZF (Pilot Scheme: Public Law Outline: Checklist). FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 36.2 makes provision for Practice Directions to modify or disapply provisions of FPR 2010 for specified periods and in relation to proceedings in specified courts during the operation of pilot schemes for assessing the use of new practices

See further, timeline. ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision to accept commitments on 17 January 2024; it is no longer maintained. Case facts Outline European Commission Article 102 TFEU investigation into Renfe’s refusal to supply full content and real-time data to rival ticketing platforms operating in the Spanish online passenger rail ticket distribution market. Latest development On 17 January 2024, the Commission accepted commitments from Aspen (see details below), and therefore closed its investigation. Parties • Renfe: Renfe is the Spanish state-owned rail incumbent operator. Renfe sells its tickets offline and online either (i) directly via its websites and apps (ie Renfe and Cercanías) and mobility platform (ie dōcō); or (ii) indirectly through third-party ticketing platforms. Renfe competes with third-party ticketing platforms, which are companies providing online ticketing services to customers through

Law360, London: Anthony Ferdinando's story was common.

This Practice Note provides guidance on the application of the SRA’s regulatory regime for firms that engage with online reviews and comparison websites. There is significant overlap in the SRA’s guidance, which is unsurprising, as some comparison websites also include a facility to post an online review. This Practice Note does not include guidance on the merits of engaging with online reviews and/or comparison websites, although the SRA seems keen to volunteer data and information about the benefits of doing so—see: • SRA, Customer reviews and comparison websites • SRA, Online reviews: How to engage with them, Why engage with online reviews • SRA, Comparison websites: How to use them effectively Online reviews Responding to online reviews is an ideal opportunity to: • show you value client feedback • reinforce your high quality and personalised service • highlight characteristics of your business perhaps not evident at first sight for new clients Managing online reviews and feedback does not have to be time consuming or expensive, although the SRA reports that a high proportion

MLex: A raft of legal challenges from Meta Platforms, TikTok, X and other digital companies to the Office of Communications’ (Ofcom) information demands, revenue rules and service categorisation is threatening to reshape the country's online safety regime. While the number of cases launched by the tech giants risks making enforcement slower in the short term, the resulting judgments could strengthen Ofcom's legal footing or lead to more lasting constraints on its powers, and potentially increase pressure for legislative change.

This Practice Note provides a high-level summary of key themes of comparison between the UK and EU online safety regimes. Specifically, this Practice Note compares the regulatory frameworks under the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) and Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, the EU Digital Services Act (EU DSA), considering their scope, the duties imposed by them, and possible sanctions for non-compliance. Background The digital landscape has seen a rise in online threats such as misinformation and harmful content which poses significant risks to individuals, in particular to vulnerable groups such as children. To protect internet users and create a safer online environment, the UK and EU have adopted legislation to regulate the internet, namely OSA 2023 and the EU DSA. Specifically, OSA 2023 creates risk-based duties of care with which service providers must comply. The EU DSA takes a similar approach, putting in place a framework for keeping online services users safe and protecting their fundamental rights, while laying out responsibilities for online businesses. A key difference between the two regimes is the wider scope of the EU DSA—broadly,

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 12 August 2016; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline, commentary and related cases. Case facts Outline CMA Chapter I CA98 investigation into a cartel in the market for the online sales of posters and frames (Case 50223). The cartel involved an agreement between competitors not to undercut each other’s prices for posters and frames sold on Amazon’s UK website. Latest developments On 1 December 2016, the CMA announced it has disqualified the director of Trod Ltd, the company found to have infringed competition law for its part in a cartel in relation to the online sale of posters and frames. Daniel Aston, managing director of Trod Ltd, has given a disqualification undertaking not to act as a director of any UK company for five years. Parties Trod Limited (in administration) (Trod), based in Birmingham, UK. GB eye Limited (GB eye) which trades as 'GB Posters', based in Sheffield, UK. Market(s) Online sales of posters and

Gambling and sport have a long association; indeed people have been betting on sporting events for as long as there have been sporting events to bet on. In recent years, though, the amount and variety of gambling within sport has increased significantly as the popularity of online gambling has soared. This Practice Note gives a broad overview of some of the main issues that arise in the field of online sports gambling, and covers the following: • licensing • sponsorship and advertising • illegal betting and match-fixing • eSports Licensing The main piece of legislation governing gambling in Great Britain is the Gambling Act 2005 (GA 2005). Gambling in Northern Ireland is outside of the scope of this Practice Note. GA 2005 defines several types of gambling and designates the Gambling Commission (the Commission) as the body responsible for ensuring that any gambling that takes place in Great Britain is appropriately licensed and otherwise complies with GA 2005. This includes remote gambling where consumers use a form of remote communication to take part, including the internet. Providing facilities

Please read the following important terms and conditions before you buy any digital content from us and check that they contain everything you want and nothing that you are not willing to agree to. Summary of some of your key rights: The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 say that you have a 14 day right to change your mind and get a full refund on your digital content. You do not have this right to cancel once a download has started provided you have been told this and have acknowledged this.The Consumer Rights Act 2015 says digital content must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. If your digital content is faulty, you’re entitled to a repair or a replacement. If the fault can’t be fixed, or if it hasn’t been fixed within a reasonable time and without significant inconvenience, you can get some, or all of your money back. If you can show the fault has damaged your device and we haven’t used reasonable care

Please read the following important terms and conditions before you buy anything on our website and check that they contain everything you want and nothing that you are not willing to agree to. Summary of some of your key rights: The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 say that up to 14 days after receiving your goods, in most cases, you can change your mind and get a full refund. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 says goods must be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. During the expected lifespan of your product you’re entitled to the following: • up to 30 days: if your goods are faulty, you can get a refund; • up to six months: if it can’t be repaired or replaced, then you’re entitled to a full refund in most cases; • up to six years: if the goods do not last a reasonable length of time, you may be entitled to some money back. This is a summary of some of your key rights. For detailed information from Citizens Advice please visit www.citizensadvice.org.uk