The components of a physical computer device. Comprises processors, memory, storage, and networking components among other things, but excludes software.

Full memory capture of a handheld device

See data room.

This Practice Note sets out the statutory requirement for the court to take into account any physical or mental disability of either party in accordance with the checklist in section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) and its Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004) equivalent, CPA 2004, Sch 5 Pt 5. It considers the interaction of disability and needs, particular issues relating to the treatment of the family home, the treatment of personal injury damages, impaired life expectancy and case management of expert and other evidence. It also provides signposting to guidance about resources from outside the relationship, disabilities of a child of the family and issues associated with litigation capacity. By virtue of MCA 1973, s 25(2)(e), the court must give consideration to: ‘...any physical or mental disability of either of the parties to the marriage’ Equivalent provision is set out in CPA 2004, Sch 5 Pt 5, para 21(2)(e). When the court is undertaking its discretionary exercise, it has a duty to consider all the circumstances

Pick Everard has published its Pre-Autumn Budget Construction Market Insight report, presenting findings from a survey of 200 industry participants which examined confidence levels and expectations for 2026 within the construction sector ahead of the Autumn Budget. The survey gathered views from contractors, developers, consultants, and clients on business outlook, project activity, and workforce trends for 2026. The findings reveal a cautiously optimistic sector, with 81% expressing positive or neutral expectations despite ongoing pressures from inflation, regulatory reform, and cost increases linked to the Building Safety Act 2022. Nearly 60% described the industry as static, reflecting uncertainty around planning reform and public spending, while 52% expect headcount and turnover to remain stable and 32% anticipate growth.

Private Client analysis: This judgment on costs followed a bitterly-fought claim to remove trustees of a Will trust worth £8.2m that included shares in a business. The Deceased’s partner and her children, as beneficiaries of the discretionary trust, brought a claim to remove all four trustees which was partly-successful, but only in replacing two of the trustees on the grounds of hostility that had arisen between them and the beneficiaries. Deputy Master Holden then had to determine who should pay the costs of the action and whether the trustees should be denied their usual indemnity from the trust. After a review of the allegations made by the Claimants and the conduct of the parties, including compliance with the pre-action protocols and offers to mediate, the Judge decided that the right order was no order as to costs and permitted the trustees to keep their indemnity. Written by Adam Smith-Roberts, barrister at Gatehouse Chambers.

This Practice Note considers the law on picketing and in particular, when it will amount to ‘peaceful’ picketing, the circumstances in which picketing may lead to criminal liability and issues relating to direct action, protests and demonstrations. The provisions of the Code of Practice on picketing is referred to where relevant. Picketing is not a term with any exhaustive statutory or other definition. However, it is generally used to refer to various types of activity which: • take place on the public highway outside a workplace, and • are aimed at gaining publicity and support for a particular cause For the purposes of section 220A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULR(C)A 1992) (repealed by the Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA 2025) with effect from 18 February 2026), picketing was defined as attendance at or near a place of work, in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute (for the meaning of this phrase, see Practice Note: The right to take industrial action—In contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute), for the purpose of: • obtaining,

Law360, London: A London court has ordered the owner of a property in Piccadilly Circus to repay more than £640,000 it overcharged tenant Picturehouse Cinemas by loading insurance premiums for the premises with top-end broker commissions for the landlord to pocket.

HM Land Registry Prescribed Clauses LR1. Date of the lease [date] LR2. Title number(s) LR2.1 Landlord's title number(s) [title number(s) out of which this Lease is granted (but leave blank if the Landlord’s title is unregistered)] LR2.2 Other title numbers [existing title number(s) against which entries of matters referred to in LR9, LR10, LR11 and LR13 are to be made] LR3. Parties to this lease Landlord [[OPTION 1—name of Landlord (not an overseas entity)] [of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [number]) whose registered office is at] [address]OR[OPTION 2—name of Landlord (overseas entity)] [incorporated OR formed] in [territory of incorporation/formation] (registration number [number]) [and registered at Companies House (company registration number BR[number])] (overseas entity ID [[number] OR not required]) whose registered office is at [address]] Tenant [[OPTION 1—name of Tenant (not an overseas entity)] [of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [number]) whose registered office is at] [address]OR[OPTION 2—name of Tenant (overseas entity)] [incorporated OR formed] in [territory of incorporation/formation] (registration number [number]) [and registered at Companies House (company registration number BR[number])] (overseas entity ID [[number] OR not required])

Piercing the corporate veil describes the exceptional judicial step of disregarding a company’s separate legal personality to treat the acts or liabilities of the company as those of its controllers (typically shareholders or directors). It is not a statutory term in UK or Irish company law, but a case law‑based, descriptive expression used across multiple contexts, most often in insolvency, enforcement and fraud litigation.In England and Wales and Northern Ireland, following cases such as *Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd*, courts will only pierce the veil in very narrow circumstances, usually where a company is used as a façade or sham to evade existing legal obligations or to perpetrate fraud. Similar principles apply in Scotland and Ireland, where courts also stress that incorporation and limited liability will be upheld unless there is abuse of the corporate structure.Piercing the corporate veil is distinct from other routes to personal liability (for example, wrongful trading, misfeasance, guarantees or statutory director liability). For practitioners, it is typically argued as a last resort, with a high evidential threshold and significant uncertainty as to outcome.

Family analysis: When are courts prepared to pierce the corporate veil? Graeme Fraser, a partner at Hunters, explores a Court of Appeal decision not to pierce the corporate veil in a cohabitation case.

This Practice Note considers the circumstances in which the court may treat the assets or benefit of a company as those of an individual defendant in confiscation proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002). It examines the limited doctrine of piercing the corporate veil in the criminal context, with particular focus on the principles established in R v Seager and Blatch and clarified by the Supreme Court in Prest v Petrodel Resources. The note also analyses how the concepts of concealment and evasion operate in confiscation cases, and reviews key appellate guidance, including R v Sale, R v Boyle and R v Powell, before outlining practical considerations for practitioners. The corporate veil A properly formed registered company is a separate legal entity from its shareholders and has separate rights and liabilities as a separate legal person. This is called the corporate veil. Thus, in the normal course of events, a company’s assets would not constitute the realisable property of any individual defendant. In order for the company’s