Arbitration analysis: In a domestic arbitration, French courts do not extend an arbitration clause to a subcontractor unless that subcontractor has clearly accepted it. The Paris Court of Appeal held that the arbitration clause contained in the main contract was manifestly inapplicable to the subcontractor, who was not a signatory and whose subcontract included a jurisdiction clause in favour of a French court. This was so even though the main contract required the contractor to include an arbitration clause in all subcontracts, and despite the existence of a payment delegation agreement referring to the arbitration clause. This decision provides a reminder that the applicability and enforceability of arbitration clauses in domestic French arbitration law remains tightly linked to consent, and that the scope for extending such clauses across complex project structures is narrower than in the international arbitration regime. Written by Clément Fouchard partner at Reed Smith, and Mathilde Adant, associate at Reed Smith.

Arbitration analysis: On 23 January 2024, the Paris Court of Appeal denied the application to set aside an international arbitral award on the basis that the award allegedly violated French international public policy because it gave effect to a distribution agreement that was in breach of EU competition law and more specifically Article 101 of the TFEU. The court implemented its ‘maximalist approach’ when assessing whether the arbitral award was compliant with French international public policy and more specifically with EU competition law, thereby confirming its previous findings that EU competition law belongs to French international public policy. Based on the factual circumstances of the case, the court considered that the applicant failed to establish the existence of a material violation of EU competition law as part of French international public policy. This decision reflects the court’s inclination in recent years to scrutinize in depth the compliance of arbitral awards with international public policy, which the court defines as values and principles whose disregard cannot be tolerated in France, even in an international context. While recent case law illustrated that these values include anti-bribery and anti-money laundering policies, this case is a reminder that they also include EU competition law principles. Written by Julie Spinelli, partner at Le 16 Law (with the assistance of Carl Szymura and Emma Ruby, associates at Le 16 Law).

The Local Government and Rating Act 1997, s 11 allows a community within England and outside Greater London at the village, neighbourhood, town or similar level beneath a district or borough council to demand its own elected parish or town council.

Private Client analysis: The court in this case decided that the trusteeship of allotment charities that had been held by rural parish councils since the Local Government Act 1894 (LGA 1894) came into effect was governed by sections 300(3)–(4) and 302 of the Charities Act 2011 (CA 2011), and that section 36 of the Trustee Act 1925 (TA 1925) does not apply. The effect is that all parish councils must appoint trustees of such allotment charities (up to a maximum referable to the number of churchwardens and/or overseers of the parish acting before LGA 1894 took effect) every four years. The wider effect of the decision is that parish councils must ensure they make such appointments every four years in respect of every charity to which these provisions of the 2011 Act apply, and not allow trustees to continue beyond their term or appoint successors under TA 1925, s 36. Written by Joshua Winfield, barrister, at Radcliffe Chambers.

Property Disputes analysis: James Andrews-Tipler of Falcon Chambers appeared for the successful claimant tenant, Park Cakes Limited (bakers and suppliers of the iconic Colin the Caterpillar Cake) in this Part 8 claim for declaratory relief in the Leeds Business & Property Courts which raised a novel point of construction of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954).

The Parker Review Committee has published its 2025 report on improving ethnic diversity in UK businesses. By December 2024, 95 out of 100 FTSE 100 companies had met the Committee's target of having at least one ethnic minority director on their boards. FTSE 250 companies were given until 31 December 2024 to meet this target, and the report reveals that 204 out of 236 companies now have at least one ethnic minority director, representing a 17% increase from 2023. As of December 2024, ethnic minority executives make up between 9% and 11% of the total number of UK-based senior managers across FTSE 100, FTSE 250, and in-scope private companies, with an average target of 13% to 15% set for 2027.

The Parker Review Committee has published its 2026 report on improving ethnic diversity in UK businesses, based on data collected for the period ending 31 December 2025. The report shows continued progress across the FTSE 350. In the FTSE 100, 98 out of 100 companies now meet the target of having at least one minority ethnic director on their boards, up from 95 companies in 2024. Minority ethnic directors now hold 20% of all FTSE 100 board positions, the highest proportion recorded since the review began. In the FTSE 250, 205 out of 231 responding companies have at least one minority ethnic director, representing 89% of those reporting and maintaining the overall figure of 82% of the full index meeting the target.

The Parker Review Committee has published an updated report on improving the ethnic diversity across UK businesses. The Parker Review was set up in 2015, its purposes to encourage UK businesses to take on ethnic minority individuals to help improve the performance of UK businesses and to ensure ethnic minorities are given equal opportunities as others. Its initial target set in 2017 was for FTSE 350 boards to have one director at minimum of an ethnic minority background by 2021 and the same for 2024. Due to the progress made, the Parker Review Committee has broadened its target to include senior management teams and some large private businesses which it believes will help their purpose. This is detailed further in the report.

An independent review led by Sir John Parker, which made a number of recommendations to prepare FTSE 350 companies to meet ethnic diversity targets.

The Parker Review Committee has published its March 2024 report into ethnic diversity across UK businesses.

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 17 June 2015; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline, commentary and related cases Case facts Outline European Commission Article 101 TFEU investigation into a cartel in the markets for fuel-operated parking heaters (which heat parked cars or trucks) and auxiliary heaters (which support the heating system of a running car or truck) (AT.40055). Latest development On 17 June 2015 the Commission announced that it has issued its enforcement decision, and that both defendants had settled with the Commission. The defendants were fined as follows: • Webasto was not fined as it received full immunity for informing the Commission of the cartel (if Webasto had not received immunity, it would have been fined €222.247m) • Eberspächer

The European Parliament has adopted updated rules to improve out-of-court dispute resolution for consumer complaints, modernising the EU’s alternative dispute resolution (ADR) framework to better suit the digital economy and cross-border cases. The new rules clarify the scope of ADR to include issues before and after contracts, and allow participation by third-country traders in certain cases. They aim to boost participation by traders and consumers through incentives and require traders to respond to ADR requests within set deadlines. The reforms also streamline procedures, enable bundling similar cases, and improve online access to information. The directive will enter into force 20 days after its publication and start to apply 32 months after publication.