Mlex: Samsung should pay $392 million to ZTE as a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory rate for its use of the Chinese company’s standard essential patents (SEPs) for cellular technology, the English High Court has ruled. The dispute has raised questions about the UK’s position as a venue for determining global fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms after ZTE opened parallel proceedings at a court in China.

Law360, London: A London court ordered Samsung on 26 August 2026 to pay several Swatch brands USD11.6 million for allowing third-party smartwatch apps that mimic existing luxury watch faces, far below the USD170 million the brands had sought.

An adverse consequence to a party of failing to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order.

Law360, London: A sanctioned company director was convicted in a criminal court in London on 25 June 2025 of failing to adequately respond to a request for information by the UK's sanctions agency.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: The High Court of Justice sanctioned a scheme of arrangement for Light SA (the Scheme), a Brazilian company, under Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). The Scheme involved two groups of creditors holding notes issued by Light SA's subsidiaries, Light Energia SA (Light Energia) and Light Serviços de Eletricidade SA (Light SESA) (together the Note Issuers) with Light SA acting as the guarantor. Both Note Issuers are regulated entities in Brazil, and their business is the generation (in the case of Light Energia) and distribution (in the case of Light SESA) of electricity in Brazil. The restructuring, approved by 99.4% of voting creditors and effective in Brazil, aims to facilitate new capital raising and note exchanges to address financial challenges, including losses incurred due to widespread energy theft and the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The Scheme offers benefits over the Brazilian judicial restructuring process, including options for New York law securities and international enforceability. Mr Justice Trower found sufficient connection to the UK jurisdiction and anticipated international recognition, particularly in Brazil, thus sanctioning the scheme. Written by Brian Rostron, associate at Addleshaw Goddard LLP.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY DIVISION INSOLVENCY AND COMPANIES LIST IN [INSERT LOCATION] The honourable [insert title eg mr] justice [insert name] [Insert date] In the matter of [insert company name] And In the

Court Reference No:[ INSERT COURT REF. NUMBER] [ In the high court of justice BUSINESS AND PROPERTY DIVISION INSOLVENCY AND COMPANIES LIST, rolls building, london OR In the high court of justice BUSINESS AND PROPERTY DIVISION INSOLVENCY AND COMPANIES LIST, IN [insert location] ] The honourable [insert title eg mr or Mrs]

The court can impose sanctions on parties to civil litigation who fail to comply with relevant rules, practice directions and court orders. These sanctions include striking out a party's claim or defence. A party can apply for relief from sanctions under Rule 3.9 of the CPR.

Various governments, under their relevant sanctions regimes, have imposed sanctions and export controls on targets in Russia and Belarus in response to the conflict in Ukraine. This Practice Note is designed to provide a starting point for banking lawyers looking into the implications of the UK sanctions since March 2022 on finance transactions. This Practice Note: • provides introductory information on the different kinds of sanctions—see: What is meant by sanctions? • summarises, or points to how to find, the additional sanctions announced or in place in the UK (and elsewhere)—see: How do I find out what UK, US and EU sanctions there are against Russia and Belarus? • sets out where to find guidance on the impact on finance transactions—see: What steps should financial institutions be taking following the additional measures? • sets out, at a high level, steps to take and points to consider in relation to existing and new lending transactions as a result of the new sanctions—see: How might the new measures impact loan transactions? • sets

Corporate Crime analysis: As reported on this blog, in 2020 the Russian State Duma adopted the Law No 171-FZ ‘to protect the right to access to justice of sanctioned parties’. The law presumes that sanctions adversely affect the position of sanctioned Russian individuals and legal entities in foreign court or arbitral proceedings and create the risk that sanctioned parties will not receive the same level of protection as their opponents. Consequently, Law 171-FZ entitles a sanctioned party to disregard a jurisdiction or arbitration agreement and to ask a Russian state commercial court to decide the dispute. The Russian state commercial courts have exclusive jurisdiction over such a dispute. It is not necessary that the applicant is in fact treated unfairly in the foreign proceedings. For the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the imposition of sanctions suffices to render a jurisdiction or arbitration agreement unenforceable. Dr Juergen Mark and Olena Oliinyk of Baker McKenzie consider how to ensure due process of sanctioned parties in court or arbitral proceedings while at the same time enforce the sanctions regime.

ARCHIVED: This Checklist has been archived and is no longer maintained. The final text of the Sanctions and Anti-money Laundering Act 2018 (SAMLA 2018) received Royal Assent on 23 May 2018. Originally proposed in the Queen’s Speech in June 2017, SAMLA 2018 introduced a domestic framework for the implementation and enforcement of international sanctions in the UK following the end of the implementation period. The purpose of SAMLA 2018 was to ensure that, following the end of the implementation period, it can continue to: • impose, update, and lift sanctions provided for by the UN and pursuant to other international obligations • effectively detect and prevent money laundering and terrorist financing, including by implementing internationally recognised standards For information on the sanctions regime under SAMLA 2018, see Practice Notes: The UK sanctions framework under SAMLA 2018 and UK sanctions regimes currently in force. Some of the provisions of SAMLA 2018 came into force straight away. Under SAMLA 2018, s 64 secondary legislation is required to bring several

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note provides information on the data protection regime before 25 May 2018 and reflects the position under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998). This Practice Note is for background information only and is not maintained. Information Commissioner The DPA 1998 is enforced by the Information Commissioner and their officers at the Information Commission’s Office (ICO). The Information Commissioner reports directly to Parliament. The Information Commissioner's duties are: • to promote good practice and observance of DPA 1998 by data controllers • to publish information and give advice • to develop codes of practice, and • international co-operation: ◦ with the European Commission and supervisory authorities in other European Economic Area (EEA) States ◦ in relation to international obligations of the UK, and ◦ in relation to the Council of Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data The ICO has published a guide to data protection, intended to assist data controllers. Numerous other topic guides are