ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. From 6 April 2025, the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, SI 2008//1277 have been revoked and replaced by the Digital Market, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCCA 2024). However, CPUTR 2008, SI 2008/1277 will still apply to any conduct occurring prior to 6 April 2025. For information on banned practices under DMCCA 2024, see Practice Note: Banned practices under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024. This Practice Note covers the offences of engaging in commercial practices that are banned under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR 2008), SI 2008/1277. CPUTR 2008, SI 2008/1277, Sch 1 lists 31 commercial practices which are prohibited and automatically considered to be unfair. The main difference between banned practices and other CPUTR 2008, SI 2008/1277 unfair commercial practices is that there is no need to consider the likely effect on consumers. Except for the banned practices associated with advertorials and advertising to

The use of member-borne commissions and consultancy charging raised concerns that they: • led to some members bearing charges without realising it or without accessing services made available by an adviser, and • act as a barrier to switching, particularly as advisers are unlikely to want to lose the benefit of these charges by recommending a switch to a pension arrangement which does not offer any commission or consultancy charging, even if that arrangement offers better value for money for members Measures were therefore introduced to prevent certain types of personal pension schemes and occupational pension schemes from using such charges. Over time, these bans were widened in scope. The enabling powers permitting the introduction of these bans can be found: • for occupational pension schemes, in section 43 of the Pensions Act 2014 (PA 2014) and PA 2014, Sch 18 • for personal pension schemes, in the general rule-making powers given to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) under sections 137A, 137T, 138C and 139A of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA

The Bar Council of England and Wales and five other UK legal professional bodies representing 250,000 lawyers have issued a joint statement  expressing concern about increasing hostility towards legal professionals. It highlights that legal professionals are being vilified simply for fulfilling their duties, which include representing clients impartially and upholding the rule of law. The statement underscores the independence of the judiciary from political influence and calls on politicians to respect the legal system. It warns that politically motivated attacks on lawyers undermine public trust in justice and democracy.

The Bar Council has urged MPs to reconsider provisions in the Immigration and Asylum Bill, which is currently at its second reading in the House of Commons. The Bar Council contends that decisions on immigration appeals should be made by legally qualified individuals, a standard previously established under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 and necessary in the context. It expresses concern that the use of lay adjudicators will increase the risk of significant legal errors and lead to higher costs. Furthermore, the appointment of adjudicators by the Home Secretary—who is the respondent to adversarial immigration appeals—raises separation of powers issues and could undermine the perceived independence of the appeals process.

The Bar Council of England and Wales has called for an urgent investigation following a leaked Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) report revealing that an IT bug caused evidence to go missing or become corrupted over several years. The report, obtained by the BBC, revealed that the HMCTS failed to address an IT bug, resulting in evidence being lost, overwritten, or appearing missing in civil, family, and tribunal court proceedings. Sources within the HMCTS indicated that judicial decisions may have been made based on incomplete evidence. The report further disclosed that HMCTS had not conducted a comprehensive investigation into the extent of the data corruption and had withheld information from judges and legal professionals, citing concerns that disclosure might cause more harm than good. In response, the Chair of the Council, Barbara Mills KC, emphasised that the potential miscarriages of justice merit an immediate investigation, particularly regarding emergency child protection cases and urged the Ministry of Justice to audit all court IT systems to ensure that they are fit for purpose.

The Bar Council has launched its ‘Manifesto for justice 2024’, urging the next government to make a significant investment of around £2.5bn into the justice system. The Bar Council has presented what it thinks the next government’s key priorities should be to address the damage caused by heavy cuts and keep up with the increased demand on the sector. The manifesto makes eight recommendations which focus on three key themes including a strong and adequately funded justice system, access to justice and upholding the rule of law.

The Bar Council has made a submission to the multi-year Spending Review. Its submission contains five priority areas which require government spending including removing the cap on court sitting days and funding measures to tackle violence against women and girls in the family court system and in criminal courts. The Bar Council's submission, which calls for more resources, was made in light of the 22.4% decrease in public spending on the justice system under the last government.

The Bar Council (BC) has published its response to the Bar Standards Board's (BSB) proposed amendments to equality rules for barristers' conduct obligations. The Council strongly opposes the BSB's recommendation to change Core Duty 8 from a duty not to discriminate to a duty to advance equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI), arguing it would be unlawful, unenforceable, and potentially counterproductive. The Council rejects proposals to abolish equality and diversity officers (EDOs) in chambers and mandatory training requirements. Instead, it proposes a simplified approach focusing on Equality Act compliance, retaining EDOs, and implementing minimum EDI training. The Council warns that the BSB's proposals lack clarity and could hinder progress on EDI issues at the Bar if enacted.

The Bar Council has published its first report, titled 'A lens on justice: The move to remote justice 2020-2024'. on the administration and delivery of remote justice from the perspective of legal professionals. The report covers four key areas including barristers’ experiences, technology and administration, monitoring of data and the number of remote hearings. Key findings include a significant decline in remote hearings between 2021 and 2023, a decline in the number of barristers who have experienced technical problems from 77% in 2021 to 35% in 2023, and lastly, that those in crime and family cases were more likely to favour remote hearings than other practice areas.

The Bar Council of England and Wales has published its response to the Law Commission's consultation on reforming compulsory purchase law. The Bar Council broadly supports the Commission's aims to simplify and modernise the system while emphasising that existing protections for affected landowners must be maintained. Key proposals include: unifying implementation procedures, standardising rights acquisition powers, and updating compensation assessment methods. The response focuses primarily on rule of law and access to justice implications, deferring to specialist practitioners on technical aspects.

The Bar Council has responded to the Autumn Budget, welcoming the 'overall settlement for justice' in the Budget. The Budget allocates a total departmental expenditure limit of £13.8bn for 2025-2026 to the Ministry of Justice. Chair of the Bar Council, Sam Townend, has welcomed this increase in funding, acknowledging it as a much-needed step towards recognizing justice as a key public service. However, Townend also emphasized that there is still a long way to go, citing a 20% real per person terms cut in justice funding since 2010. Townend has stated that to move beyond crisis mode, sustained funding will be crucial in the next spending review.

The Bar Council and the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) have urged the government to honour its 2024 Labour manifesto promise by establishing specialist sexual and domestic abuse courts at every Crown Court in England and Wales. They argue that this approach is preferable to imposing restrictions on jury trials as a means of addressing the criminal justice crisis. In their proposed amendments to the Courts and Tribunals Bill, the Bar Council and CBA emphasise the need for specialist courts, particularly in light of the current Crown Court backlog of 80,000 cases. Separately, the Bar Council has expressed concerns regarding government plans to transfer cases to magistrates' courts. This warning comes after new Ministry of Justice statistics revealed that the magistrates' court backlog has reached a record 379,437 cases—a 17% increase from 2025.