The Cabinet Office has updated Procurement Policy Note 010: Procuring steel in government contracts (PPN 010), which provides in-scope organisations with guidance on steel procurement in government projects under the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023). PPN 010 applies to central government departments, their executive agencies and non-departmental public bodies when awarding public contracts (as defined by PA 2023, s 3), other than special regime contracts (as defined by PA 2023, s 10(6)),  where steel is being procured directly or indirectly (relevant steel procurement). Other contracting authorities are encouraged to consider applying the best practice set out in PPN 010, as appropriate, where they do not have equivalent measures in place. PPN 010 provides guidance on policies, tools and methodologies relating to the design of relevant steel procurements and clarifies the scope of reporting requirements on origin data forming part of the annual steel data return to the Department for Business and Trade. PPN 010 has been updated to include an example contract clause and actuals data template for the associated steel product and origin data requirements. PPN 010 has also been updated to reflect terminology introduced by PA 2023 and the Procurement Regulations 2024, SI 2024/692. For procurements commenced before the PA 2023 go-live on 24 February 2025, authorities should continue to refer to PPN 04/23.

In the case of a security guard who works a shift in excess of 6 hours in length, (1) the specific exemption, relating to security and surveillance activities, which allows the employer not to provide a 20-minute rest break during the shift, (a) does not apply in every case where the employer is obliged to ensure that one worker or another is permanently present on site, (b) will only apply (i) to a worker whose own work pattern requires that particular worker to be permanently present throughout his shift, and (ii) even in those cases, only where the employer can show there were objective reasons why a full normal rest break could not have been provided to him, (2) although it will always be possible to provide a full normal rest break to all workers, if money were no object, by hiring extra security guards, if the employer can show that any significant additional cost could have undermined its ability to secure the contract at all and would have threatened the jobs of the security officers or their pay, this factor can provide an objective reason allowing the exemption to apply, and (3) where the exemption does apply, and hence the employer is obliged instead to provide an 'equivalent period of compensatory rest', this alternative requirement will be satisfied if the employer provides, at an alternative time, a break from work which lasts for at least 20 minutes, according to the Court of Appeal in Hughes v Corps of Commissionaires Management.

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) has announced a £410m investment package to accelerate the development of fusion energy over 2025-26. This funding is intended to support various initiatives, including the Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production (STEP) project and the Fusion Futures programme for skills development and new research and development facilities, among other initiatives. UK Industrial Fusion Solutions (UKIFS) has shortlisted five organisations to become the engineering and construction partners for the STEP project. This project is designed to facilitate the construction of a prototype fusion power plant at the West Burton site in Nottinghamshire, scheduled for completion by 2040. UKIFS plans to conduct detailed discussions with the shortlisted organisations, with contracts expected to be awarded to one engineering and one construction partner by late 2025 or early 2026. The initial contract period will run until 2029, with further phases planned for long-term collaboration. The government also recently announced plans for the UK's first AI Growth Zone to be at the UK Atomic Energy Authority's fusion energy campus in Culham, which will utilise AI advancements to leverage computing power for fusion research.

Arbitration analysis: In deciding an application for the appointment of an arbitrator, the Indian Supreme Court provided helpful guidance as to the circumstances in which a non-signatory may be joined as a party to an arbitration. In the context of a multi-party dispute, the Supreme Court that the relationship of the non-signatory with one or more signatories as well as the participation of the non-signatory in the negotiation, performance and termination of the underlying contract were important factors that ought to be considered in order to determine whether the non-signatory had in fact consented to be a party to the arbitration agreement. The Supreme Court also held that in circumstances where issues of law and fact in making such a determination would likely be complex, the arbitral tribunal (and not the courts) should decide whether or not a non-signatory was in fact a party to the arbitration agreement. Written by Promod Nair, senior advocate at High Court of Karnataka.

Arbitration analysis: The court dismissed an application for a stay of Part 20 proceedings in favour of arbitration, deciding that the parties had not agreed to refer the matters in such proceedings to arbitration. Mr Justice Waksman held that the respondents were not bound to the arbitration agreement relied upon, but he also went on to find that even if they had been, the essential matters in the proceedings did not fall within the scope of the arbitration clause. Notably, the judge refused to allow the contrived introduction of a defence to bring the case within the scope of an arbitration clause. While much of the reasoning turned on the interpretation of the contract and an analysis of the proceedings in question, in the course of his decision, Justice Waksman held that (i) the question of whether one of the parties to the proceedings was a party to the arbitration agreement falls under section 9(1) rather than section 9(4) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) paras [42]–[43]; (ii) the burden of establishing that a party is bound by an arbitration agreement thus rests with the party relying on the arbitration agreement, save to the extent the respondent is relying on vitiating factors [39], [43]-[44]; (iii) the making of a s9 application after a jurisdiction application does not necessarily amount to an abuse of process. Written by Jennifer Haywood, barrister, arbitrator and mediator at Serle Court.

Arbitration analysis: The Bordeaux Court of Appeal upheld French jurisdiction over a claim by Sea Tankers Management (STM)’s liquidator for the wrongful termination of ship management contracts despite the presence of arbitration clauses therein. The liquidator sued Maltese entities of the [Localité 12] Group, alleging that their tortious conduct, including the wrongful termination of these contracts, caused STM’s insolvency. The court found the arbitration clauses to be ‘manifestly inapplicable’ under Article 1448 of the French Code of Civil Procedure because the dispute fell outside their scope. The court considered that the dispute was based on tort (Article 1240 of the French Civil Code), not contract, and that the liquidator was acting on behalf of the creditors (third parties to the contracts) rather than STM itself. The decision highlights how, under French law, a liquidator’s dual capacity can limit the effect of arbitration clauses in cross border insolvency cases, especially when claims involve creditor interests. Written by Veronika Timofeeva, senior associate at Freshfields, and Mathilde Allard, Associate at Freshfields.

A body formed pursuant to the provisions of a building contract (eg FIDIC contracts) which has authority to decide disputes referred to it by the parties to the contract. The extent of the dispute board’s powers, its procedures and its ability for its decisions to bind the contracting parties will be set out in the contract. There are two types of dispute boards—a dispute review board and a dispute adjudication board (the latter is able to issue binding decisions). See subtopic: Dispute Boards.

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 SI 2013/1237 SCHEDULE 1 THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS RULES OF PROCEDURE INTRODUCTORY AND GENERAL 1 Interpretation "ACAS" means the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service referred to in section 247 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992; "claim" means any proceedings before an Employment Tribunal making a complaint; "claimant" means the person bringing the claim; "Commission for Equality and Human Rights" means the body established under section 1 of the Equality Act 2006; "complaint" means anything that is referred to as a claim, complaint, reference, application or appeal in any enactment which confers jurisdiction on the Tribunal; "early conciliation certificate" means a certificate issued by ACAS in accordance with the Employment Tribunals (Early Conciliation: Exemptions and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013; "early conciliation exemption" means an exemption contained in regulation 3(1) of the Employment Tribunals (Early Conciliation: Exemptions and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2014; "early conciliation

Insurance is a form of contract whereby a sum of money is promised to be paid by the insurer to the insured on the happening of a specified event.

A court order requiring a positive act of performance as a remedy.

Where the employer insists the employee waits out their period of notice, not working for the employer, but not working for anyone else either.

An annuity contract between an insurance company or friendly society and a self-employed individual or a person in employment who did not have access to an occupational pension scheme, which was established before 1 July 1988.