Possession with intent to supply a controlled drug It is an offence for a person to have a controlled drug in their possession, whether lawfully or not, with intent to supply it to another in contravention of section 4(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (MDA 1971). Elements of the offence of possession with intent to supply The prosecution have to prove, to the criminal standard (see Practice Note: Burden and standard of proof in criminal proceedings) that: • the defendant was in possession of drugs • the drugs are controlled drugs, and • the defendant intended to supply the drugs to another Possession with intent to supply is triable in either the magistrates’ or Crown Court unless the offence is one where, if convicted, the defendant would face a sentence of at least seven years’ imprisonment under section 313 of the Sentencing Act 2020 (SA 2020) (see below), in which case it should be dealt with in the Crown Court. However, only in exceptional cases involving the smallest quantity

Property Disputes analysis: The Court of Appeal clarified the strict interaction between section 21A of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988) and the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 in cases involving pre- and post-1 October 2015 tenancies. It held that, for any tenancy granted after that date, a valid section 21 notice requires prior provision of the gas safety certificate issued before the tenant’s original occupation, even if that occupation pre-dated the prescribed requirements. The court rejected arguments permitting later compliance or treating renewed tenancies as resetting obligations. The decision confirms that failure to provide a pre-occupation certificate is irremediable, significantly restricting landlords’ ability to rely on section 21 and exposing historic non-compliance to decisive consequences. Produced in partnership with Tom Morris of Landmark Chambers.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: Lindsay Hingston, associate at Freshfields, considers the decision in Private Equity Insurance Group SIA v Swedbank AS, a case concerning the enforcement of financial collateral post-insolvency.

A possessory interest describes a person’s factual control of land with an intention to possess, giving enforceable rights against third parties even where they lack paper or registered title. It is a descriptive expression used across property, tort/delict and valuation contexts, not generally defined by statute. Case law identifies the elements of possession (factual control plus intention to possess), enabling the possessor to sue in trespass or nuisance and, in landlord and tenant matters, to claim or grant exclusive possession through a lease (a licence does not create a possessory interest).Typical uses include adverse possession (title by limitation), recovery of land, interim relief to restrain trespass, security enforcement, insolvency, rating (rateable occupation) and compulsory purchase compensation (interests in land).Jurisdictional points:- England and Wales: adverse possession can mature into title (10 years for registered land under LRA 2002 Sch 6; generally 12 for unregistered). Land registration recognises “possessory title” as a class where evidence of title is incomplete-related but not the same as a mere possessory interest.- Scotland: possession is protected (e.g. spuilzie) and relevant to positive prescription, but ownership usually requires a foundation writ; bare possession does not itself ripen into ownership.- Northern Ireland and Ireland: adverse possession exists, with differing limitation periods and rules (Ireland generally 12 years; longer against the State). Usage of the term is broadly consistent.

See Talks Announcement.

In proceedings that were issued by the court before the 6 April 2022 (the date on which the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 (DDSA 2020) came into effect) a respondent who wished to make an application for a matrimonial order had to make the application for that order within 21 days beginning with the date by which the respondent's acknowledgment of service was required to be filed, unless the court gave permission to make the application after that time has passed. Following the introduction of ‘no fault divorce’ in DDSA 2020 the position has changed. Under Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 7.12(1)(b), a respondent may make an application for a matrimonial or civil partnership order other

The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry, chaired by Sir Wyn Williams, has published the first volume of its final report. The inquiry is tasked with producing a public summary of the failings of the Horizon IT system at the Post Office, which led to the suspension, contract termination, prosecution and conviction of sub-postmasters. The 162-page report, laid before Parliament on 8 July 2025, focuses on the human impact of the scandal. The findings are based on hearings and evidence submitted up to 6 June 2025, involving approximately 225 days of hearings, 298 witnesses and over 250,000 documents. The report outlines 19 urgent recommendations to ensure full and fair redress for affected sub-postmasters and their families, starting with calls for a public announcement from the government and the Post Office on the agreed definition of ‘full and fair financial redress’, to ensure consistency across all schemes. The report makes a number of specific recommendations relating to the Horizon Shortfall Scheme (HSS) and related schemes, including a revised of deadline of 27 November 2025 for further HSS claims, access to legal advice funded by the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) for all HSS claimants, and the appointment of a senior lawyer to the HSS with powers to ensure that full and fair offers are delivered as soon as possible. The report also recommends the creation of a process for providing fair financial redress to close family members of those most adversely affected by Horizon. Further proposals include the creation of a standing public body, acting as a compensating authority, to devise and manage compensation schemes for victims of wrongdoing by public bodies. The government (and where appropriate the Post Office and Fujitsu) must respond to the recommendations in writing by 10 October 2025, and report on progress regarding any agreed programme of restorative justice by 31 October 2025.

Corporate Crime analysis: Niall Hearty, partner at Rahman Ravelli, considers how the Post Office Horizon scandal happened and its impact on private prosecutors.

Family analysis: The Children and Families Bill 2013 includes provisions as to contact between adopted children and their birth parents after placement, removing the current positive obligation on local authorities to facilitate reasonable contact. Nicola Gunn, partner at Anthony Gold solicitors and specialist in family and Court of Protection law, considers some of the key issues arising from the Bill.

Family analysis: The Court of Appeal judgment in Re S (Placement Order Contact) carefully considers the court’s approach to contact between siblings at the placement for adoption stage. There has been a shift in recent years with a great deal of research as to the potential advantages to adopted children of maintaining some sort of direct contact with their birth family. That being said, on the ground it remains unusual for orders to be made under section 26 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002 (ACA 2002) for direct contact, with proposals in final care plans often being for indirect or letterbox contact. The Court of Appeal makes clear that in each case where placement orders are made, there needs to be a bespoke analysis of the future contact arrangements, in order to meet the complex and life-long needs of children who are to be placed for adoption. Written by Gemma Adams, associate solicitor at Dawson Cornwell LLP.

[We acknowledge receipt of your request to start work during the cancellation period. We now [enclose OR attach] confirmation of the contract as follows: OR The cancellation period has now passed and we are therefore able to start

[We acknowledge receipt of your request to start work during the cancellation period. We now [enclose OR attach] [a copy of the signed contract OR confirmation of the contract] as follows: OR The cancellation period has now passed