Loan market and developments Please provide a brief overview of the current state of the loan markets in your jurisdiction and any significant recent market developments Please note that the below does not take into account any consequences or developments following a possible Brexit. Ten years after the crisis, the financial sector in Belgium has undergone a metamorphosis. The banking system has contracted mainly because of restructuring operations in entities that received government support. Banks have adopted more traditional business models, with greater emphasis on domestic lending and deposit funding. The credit cycle is intensifying, bolstered by both the economic recovery and the highly favourable financing conditions. In general, lending to businesses has continued to rise, while the growth of loans to households has stabilised. According to the Financial Stability Report 2018 of the National Bank of Belgium, the annual growth of business loans stood at 5.8 % in February 2018, compared to 4.9 % for households. Since improving economic conditions and low interest rates increased the appetite for borrowing in the private sector, loans to non-financial

TMT analysis: This is the latest round of proceedings in the Lachaux litigation odyssey. In earlier stages of the proceedings, the defendants had sought to argue that the claimant’s claim did not satisfy the serious harm threshold in section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013 (DA 2013). In these latest proceedings, it was for the High Court to determine liability. The court rejected the defence of publication on a matter of public interest and awarded the claimant £50,000 in damages against the first defendant and £70,000 against the second defendant. Written by Dominic Walker, solicitor at JMW Solicitors LLP.

Employment analysis: The belief that sex is biologically immutable, that there are only two sexes (male and female), that men are adult males and women are adult females, and that it is sex that is fundamentally important, rather than ‘gender’, ‘gender identity’ or ‘gender expression’, is a philosophical belief protected under section 10 of the Equality Act 2010, according to the EAT, in a judgment which clarifies the proper application of the Grainger test as to whether or not a belief is ‘worthy of respect in a democratic society’.

The Theft Act 1968 (TA 1968), s 5, and the Criminal Damage Act 1971, s 10, provide that property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary right or interest.

This practical guidance relates to the Procurement Act 2023 regime As of 24 February 2025, the main provisions of the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023) are in force. Procurements begun on or after this date must be carried out under PA 2023 (where applicable), whereas those begun under the previous legislation (the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, SI 2015/102, the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016, SI 2016/274, the Concession Contracts Regulations 2016, SI 2016/273, and the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011, SI 2011/1848) must continue to be procured and managed under that legislation. This practical guidance focuses on public procurement under PA 2023. For practical guidance on below-threshold contracts under the previous legislation, see Practice Note: Considerations when authorities procure contracts that are not subject to the full procurement regime—pre PA 2023. The below-threshold public procurement regime Generally, the below-threshold public procurement regime allows contracting authorities greater flexibility in designing a suitable procurement exercise. The provisions under PA 2023, Pt 6 set out the rules governing the procurement

A bench warrant is a court-issued arrest warrant directing police to detain and bring before the court a person who has failed to attend a hearing, failed to surrender to bail, disobeyed a summons or order, or (in some cases) a witness who has not complied with a witness summons. It is used in criminal proceedings and, where contempt or attendance is in issue, in some civil and family contexts.“Bench warrant” is a descriptive term rather than a single defined statutory label. The underlying powers derive from legislation and court rules in each jurisdiction empowering magistrates/judges to issue warrants for non-attendance and for witnesses, and to order arrest for contempt.Key features and practice:- Issued by the court “from the bench” and remains in force until executed or withdrawn.- May be endorsed “backed for bail” (allowing police bail) or “no bail” (requiring the person to be held to court).- Typically executed by any constable/Garda and the person must be produced at the earliest opportunity.- Distinct from extradition or European Arrest Warrants.Jurisdictions:- England & Wales and Northern Ireland commonly use “bench warrant”.- Scotland uses the broadly equivalent “warrant to apprehend”.- Ireland uses “bench warrant” in the District and higher courts.Cross-border execution requires the applicable statutory backing procedures.

A measure against which the performance of a fund is measured; it might be for example the FTSE 100. Peer group benchmarks (ie comparing your fund against other similar funds) have fallen into disfavour following Myners, and funds if they do benchmark, nowadays use individualised or customised benchmarks.

The land value determined as part of a viability assessment. The starting point is EUV plus an evidence-based premium, in some cases the AUV may also be deemed appropriate.

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. Financial Services Enforcement Database: This incorporates detailed information on all substantive FCA and PRA Final Notices and, where available, Decision Notices from 2014 onwards. The Database, available here, may be searched and filtered by rule breach, keyword including ‘LIBOR’, sector, date, seriousness, aggravating and mitigating factors, financial penalty, and other actions such as referrals to the Upper Tribunal. Prior to LIBOR reform, there were major concerns surrounding the administration and manipulation of financial market benchmarks, which led to investigations by regulators around the world and consequent enforcement and criminal action. Partly as a consequence of these actions, changes were made to the way in which these benchmarks are run and administered. The benchmarks which were the focus of enforcement action include foreign exchange, gold fixing and gilts, among others. However, much of the enforcement action and media attention centred around the manipulation of LIBOR. This Practice Note summarises regulatory enforcement actions surrounding the manipulation of benchmarks, including LIBOR, EURIBOR, foreign exchange (forex or FX),

Theoretical portfolio of benchmark assets against which the performance of an actual portfolio is measured.

The process used to test whether the ongoing price of services such as Hard FM Services is in line with market standards for that service and is value for money (VfM).

Benchmarking and information-sharing arrangements can improve efficiency, quality, innovation and risk management. They may, however, infringe the Chapter I prohibition of the Competition Act 1998 or Article 101 TFEU where the exchange reduces uncertainty about how participants will compete or facilitates coordination, monitoring or retaliation. The rules can apply to direct, indirect, reciprocal, one-way, public or digital exchanges. No formal agreement is required and, depending on the circumstances, a single disclosure may be sufficient. NOTE—This Checklist focuses on information sharing between actual or potential competitors, including competition as sellers, purchasers, bidders or employers. Information sharing in the context of a transaction, joint venture, regulatory process or wider collaboration may require a separate assessment and tailored clean-team arrangements. See further: Information exchange under UK competition law and Information exchange under EU competition law. Where the exercise is conducted through an industry body, see further: Trade associations and competition law risk. When can benchmarking or information sharing create competition law risk? The first question is who will share what information, with whom, by what route and for what