This Practice Note provides a general overview of remote participation via live link in criminal proceedings in England and Wales. It covers the statutory and procedural framework under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003), the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, the Criminal Practice Directions (CPD) and the Lady Chief Justice's Live Links in Criminal Courts Guidance 2026 (Live Links Guidance). For more detailed information on the Live Links Guidance, see Practice Note: Guidance for live links in the criminal courts. Note that the Live Links Guidance applies to magistrates’ courts and Crown Courts. It does not apply to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) or the Single Justice Procedure in the magistrates’ court. For information on the practical steps to ensure that attendance at remote criminal hearings run smoothly, see Practice Note: Practical guide to remote hearings in the criminal courts as well as Practical tips for remote attendance at criminal hearings—checklist. What is a remote hearing? A remote hearing is a court hearing in which one or more participants

Remote hearings are ones which are conducted using any form of electronic communication (eg telephone or video). This is in contrast to the traditional in-person hearing where everyone is physically present at an employment tribunal hearing centre. Historically, the employment tribunals heard almost all hearings in-person. However, the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic seriously disrupted the operational capabilities of the employment tribunals and the principal way in which hearings could be conducted safely during that time was by a dramatic increase in the use of remote hearings. While the restrictions in place during the pandemic no longer apply, employment tribunals continue to conduct significantly more hearings remotely than they did prior to the pandemic. For further background and details of how and when employment tribunals decide whether to conduct a hearing in-person, remotely or partly remotely (ie in a hybrid format), see Practice Note: Format of employment tribunal hearings. This Practice Note looks at how employment tribunal hearings are conducted remotely, in particular by reference to the Presidential Guidance on matters relating to the mode and listing

Dispute Resolution analysis: An admitted contemnor subject to a suspended warrant for committal has been ordered to attend in person for cross examination in relation to the assets of a company he controlled. His request to attend the hearing remotely by video link from Connecticut was refused. Written by Phillip Patterson, barrister, Gatehouse Chambers.

This document provides guidance to [insert eg, partners] and any other member of staff involved in supervising staff working remotely. It also applies to the supervision of contractors who work remotely. It sits alongside our Supervision policy, which must be followed at all times. What the SRA expects from us The SRA imposes general requirements on supervising work, together with specific regulatory requirements in relation to training and supervising our trainee solicitors. The SRA’s core regulatory requirements in relation to supervision are found in the two Codes of Conduct (the SRA Code for Solicitors, RELs, RFLs and RSLs and the SRA Code for Firms), which should be read in the context of the SRA Principles. Additional requirements relating to supervision are peppered throughout the SRA Standards and Regulations. The core requirements in the Codes of Conduct are set out below: Obligations applying to the firm Obligations applying to individual solicitors, RELs, RFLs and RSLs regulated by the SRA The firm remains accountable for compliance with the SRA’s regulatory arrangements where our work is carried out through

1 Introduction 1.1 While remote working (whether at home or on the go) and removable media offer our business and customers great benefits, they can also expose us to risks that are not easy to manage. 1.2 This policy explains details of those risks, as well as the procedures we have in place to mitigate them. 2 Responsibility and application 2.1 [State name or role, eg The Data Protection Officer (DPO)] is responsible for this policy. 2.2 This policy applies to all staff. 3 The risks Remote working and removable media involve the transit and storage of confidential and sensitive data outside the secure environment of the office, usually across the internet and sometimes in public places. This exposes us to significant risks. 3.1 Loss or theft of data Mobile devices are highly susceptible to being lost or stolen and they may not have the same level of physical security as devices we keep at the office. 3.2 Public place vulnerability Working remotely sometimes means working in a public place (such as a café or on a train). This presents the risk that you are observed by someone else, and the security

If the damage was not reasonably foreseeable, the defendant will not be held responsible and the damage is said to be too remote.

This Practice Note focuses on the forced removal of an administrator from office and substitution with an alternative office-holder. Replacement due to vacation of office by an administrator for other reasons is touched upon briefly. The provisions relating to removal and replacement of an administrator are found in paragraphs 87–99 of Schedule B1 to the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) and the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024, rr 3.62–3.70. This Practice Note does not deal with applications to end administration, as to which, see Practice Note: How an administration comes to an end—Application to court to end administration. Who may substitute/remove? If the administrator was appointed out of court by the company or its directors and there was no holder of a qualifying floating charge in respect of the company’s property (QFCH), then an administrator may be removed and replaced by a decision of the creditors made by a qualifying decision procedure. The decision has effect only if, before the decision is made, the new administrator has

Directions given by an immigration officer or by the Secretary of State to the owners, agents or captain of a ship or aircraft or to the operator of the international service of the Channel tunnel system to remove a person from the United Kingdom in any ship or aircraft specified or through the tunnel system.

A trade mark is a badge of origin that distinguishes the goods or services of one undertaking from those of another. An EU trade mark (EUTM) registration is a single trade mark covering all EU Member States. An EUTM is obtained by means of a single trade mark application filed at the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), located in Alicante, Spain. For more information about EUTMs, see Practice Note: EU trade marks (EUTMs) and for more information about the legislation underpinning the EUTM regime, see Practice Note: EU trade marks—legislation. Registration of a trade mark does not guarantee indefinite rights in that mark. The proprietor must maintain the registration through prompt renewals, keeping it in use, avoiding it becoming generic and by defending the registration against any use of an infringing mark by third parties. Once a trade mark has been registered, it will be valid for an initial period—ten years in the case of EUTMs—and can then theoretically be renewed indefinitely. It is also possible

A trade mark is a badge of origin that distinguishes the goods or services of one undertaking from those of another. Trade marks can be protected in the UK both by registration under the Trade Marks Act 1994 (TMA 1994) or under the law of passing off. EU trade marks (EUTMs) are protected under Regulation (EU) 2017/1001. Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 was revoked in the UK at 11.00 pm on 31 December 2020 (IP completion day), meaning that the UK is no longer part of the EUTM regime and, therefore, EUTMs are not protected in the UK. Pursuant to the Trade Marks (Amendment etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/269, holders of EUTMs immediately before IP completion day were granted comparable national trade mark registrations which are governed by TMA 1994. Comparable marks derived from EUTMs are known as ‘comparable trade marks (EU)’. For further information, see Practice Note: Trade mark rights before and after Brexit—comparison table. The revocation of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 means that the UK no longer has

This Practice Note looks at how a company secretary of a public or private company may be removed. It does not discuss how a company secretary of a public company or a private company may be appointed or resign, as to which see Practice Notes: Appointment of a company secretary and Resignation of a company secretary. Removal of a company secretary Neither the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) nor the model articles contain any provisions relating to how a company secretary may be removed. The company’s

This Practice Note focuses on the procedure set out in the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) to remove a director of a company from office and should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: How to remove a company director and Appointment, retirement and resignation of a director. For an illustration of the steps that must be taken to remove a director, see Removal of a director—flowchart. Removal from office Resolution to remove a director A director may be removed from office by ordinary resolution of the members passed at a general meeting of a company before the expiration of their period of office and, notwithstanding anything in any agreement between the director and the company, pursuant to CA 2006, s 168. For a sample ordinary resolution to remove a director from office, see Precedent: Removal of a director—ordinary resolution. Shareholder activists may propose the removal of a director (or the entire board of directors) if they feel that there have been leadership or corporate governance failings. An activist shareholder may requisition a resolution (whether by requisitioning