This Practice Note provides practical guidance on the rules of origin applicable to trade in goods under the under the UK and Eastern and Southern Africa States (ESA) and Economic Partnership Agreement (UK-ESA EPA). Introduction Rules of Origin are the criteria used to determine the origin of a good. The Rules of Origin of the UK-ESA EPA is important for trade between the parties to the UK-ESA EPA. This is so as only the goods which are deemed to originate in the territories of UK-ESA EPA parties would be subject to the preferential tariffs. For guidance on the trade in goods under the UK-ESA EPA and the applicable tariff commitments, see Practice Note: Trade in goods under the UK-ESA EPA. Non-originating goods are subject to the tariff treatment typically as catered for under the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework, where the goods will attract the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rate which applies to all WTO Member States. For guidance on MFN, see Practice Note: An introduction to Trade in Goods. For guidance on the

This Practice Note provides practical guidance on the rules of origin applicable to trade in goods under the United Kingdom and India Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (UK-India CETA). Introduction Rules of Origin are the criteria used to determine the origin of a good. The Rules of Origin of the UK-India CETA are important for trade between the UK and India. This is so as only the goods which are deemed to originate in either territory would be subject to the preferential tariffs (which is mostly zero-rated). For guidance on the trade in goods under the UK-India CETA and the applicable tariff commitments, see Practice Note: Trade in goods under the UK-India CETA. Non-originating goods are subject to the tariff treatment typically as catered for under the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework, where the goods will attract the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rate which applies to all WTO Member States. For guidance on MFN, see Practice Note: An introduction to Trade in Goods. For guidance on the WTO’s Agreement on Rules of Origin, see Practice

This Practice Note provides practical guidance on the rules of origin applicable to trade in goods under the under the UK and Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (UK-Japan CEPA). Introduction Rules of Origin are the criteria used to determine the origin of a good. The Rules of Origin of the UK-Japan CEPA is important for trade between the parties to the UK-Japan CEPA. This is so as only the goods which are deemed to originate in the territories of UK-Japan CEPA parties would be subject to the preferential tariffs. For guidance on the trade in goods under the UK-Japan CEPA and the applicable tariff commitments, see Practice Note: Trade in goods under the UK-Japan CEPA. Non-originating goods are subject to the tariff treatment typically as catered for under the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework, where the goods will attract the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rate which applies to all WTO Member States. For guidance on MFN, see Practice Note: An introduction to Trade in Goods. For guidance on the WTO’s Agreement on Rules of

This Practice Note provides practical guidance on the rules of origin applicable to trade in goods under the under the UK and Southern African Customs Union Member States and Mozambique Economic Partnership Agreement (UK-SACUM EPA). Introduction Rules of Origin are the criteria used to determine the origin of a good. The Rules of Origin of the UK-SACUM EPA is important for trade between the parties to the UK-SACUM EPA. This is so as only the goods which are deemed to originate in the territories of UK-SACUM EPA parties would be subject to the preferential tariffs. For guidance on the trade in goods under the UK-SACUM EPA and the applicable tariff commitments, see Practice Note: Trade in goods under the UK-SACUM EPA. Non-originating goods are subject to the tariff treatment typically as catered for under the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework, where the goods will attract the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rate which applies to all WTO Member States. For guidance on MFN, see Practice Note: An introduction to Trade in Goods. For guidance on

This Practice Note provides practical guidance on how to obtain proof of origin. The guidance covers the practicalities of obtaining such proof under the UK’s free trade agreements, the Developing Countries Trading Scheme as well as the non-preferential rules of origin. Introduction Rules of origin are the rules which determine if a product does originate in a specific territory/country. The origin of a product determines if the product is treated more favourably under a specific free trade agreement. However, the origin of a product is also used to: • implement anti-dumping duties, countervailing measures and to a limited extent, safeguard measures • apply labelling and marking requirements for imported products • ensure that government procures products from the source it requires, and • track trading activities for trade statistic purposes To claim the benefit of the origin of a product, an importer or exporter will have to provide proof of the origin of the goods. What rules of origin apply? The first question to determine is which rules of origin

The Court of Justice of the European Union has announced that the rules on transferring part of its jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings to the General Court became applicable on 1 October 2024. Requests for preliminary rulings will continue to be submitted to the Court of Justice for preliminary analysis of their subject matter. Where the subject matter sits exclusively within one or more of the specific areas set out in Regulation (EU/Euratom) 2024/2019, it will then be transferred to the General Court. The General Court’s decisions will carry the same weight as those of the Court of Justice, with potential for review where there is a serious risk of the unity or consistency of EU law being affected.

Law360, London: In the judgment handed down on 31 January 2025 in R v. Guralp Systems Ltd, the Court of Appeal held that the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) can apply to the court to terminate a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) after the date upon which it was stated to come to an end. The judgment shows that the courts' approach to DPAs is governed by the rules of contract and that their provisions are interpreted following the same principles as any commercial contract.

TMT analysis: This is the latest ruling in the long-running libel claim brought by companies in the Dyson Group against Channel 4 and ITN over a broadcast examining allegations of ‘appalling abuse and exploitation’ at the factories of ATA, a Malaysian company that manufactured Dyson products. The court held that the broadcast was defamatory of the claimants, via statements of fact as well as opinion, but that the allegations were of responsibility, ie short of complicity. The judgment gives important guidance on how to evaluate a broadcast where viewers form an overall impression based not just on the script, and on how ‘a lot of mitigating material’ can lessen the defamatory meaning. Written by Isabella Piasecka, knowledge lawyer, managing associate at Mishcon de Reya.

Dispute Resolution analysis: The court has dismissed two disclosure-related applications by Noel Clarke at the outset of his libel and data protection trial against The Guardian. The claimant sought: (1) disclosure of the defendant's certified transcripts of audio files, and (2) the removal of redactions made, according to the defendant, to protect confidential journalistic sources. The judge held that transcripts of non-privileged conversations cannot be privileged, even when produced for litigation purposes, but nevertheless declined to order disclosure where it was not necessary for the fair disposal of the trial. She also refused the redactions application, where the claimant had plainly failed to establish convincingly that it was necessary to override the important public interest, in the interests of justice, in protecting journalistic sources. Written by Isabella Piasecka, managing associate and Sam Clare, trainee solicitor at Mishcon de Reya LLP.

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: Can a motor insurer sued directly under the European Communities (Rights Against Insurers) Regulations 2002 (2002 Regulations) bring a Part 20 claim in its own name pursuant to the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (CL(C)A 1978)? The potential additional party argued not. Written by Jamie Clarke, barrister at Crown Office Chambers.

Law360, London: A judge ruled on 25 July 2025 that England has exclusive jurisdiction to hear a €400m dispute over the validity of transactions Dexia SA signed with Comune di Torino in Italy to restructure the municipal government's debts.

Law360: A 13 November 2025 decision from the US District Court for the Southern District of New York in Flextronics International Ltd v Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty SE represents far more than a routine confirmation of an arbitration award: It is a meaningful recalibration of several foundational issues in directors and officers insurance coverage—allocation, insurability, 'best efforts' obligations and the limits of insurer challenges to arbitral decisions.