Family analysis: Richard Miller, the Law Society’s legal aid manager, looks at the Court of Appeal’s ruling that the Legal Services Commission (now the Legal Aid Agency) was wrong to refuse to pay in full for an expert witness report ordered in relation to a child by the family court.

Spoliation refers to the destruction, alteration, concealment or loss of evidence that is, or may become, relevant to legal proceedings, particularly after a duty to preserve that evidence has arisen. It commonly arises in civil litigation, regulatory investigations and criminal proceedings where documents, electronic records, CCTV or physical objects are not properly preserved.Across England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, “spoliation of evidence” is largely a descriptive term rather than a defined statutory concept. Its consequences are shaped mainly by case law and procedural rules on disclosure, discovery and the court’s case management powers.Key legal issues include whether the spoliation was deliberate, reckless or negligent, and whether it prejudices a fair trial. Courts may draw adverse inferences, impose costs sanctions, strike out a claim or defence, or refer the matter for disciplinary or criminal action (for example, perverting the course of justice or contempt of court).In practice, spoliation underpins duties to implement litigation holds, suspend routine document destruction, and preserve electronically stored information. It is central to risk management, compliance and evidential strategy in contentious matters throughout the UK and Ireland.

In acquisition finance transactions the institutional equity investor that acts as the financial sponsor of the transaction.

A licence issued by the Home Office to an employer or education provider to enable it to sponsor non-EEA migrant workers or students in the UK under Tiers 2, 4 and 5 of the Points-Based System.

The Home Office has made a number of changes to the various Workers and Temporary Workers Sponsor Guidance documents, on 9 April 2025. The main changes to the three primary guidance documents as well as to the Sponsor a Skilled Worker guidance, which are in addition to changes in Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules HC 733,  are set out below. These include expansion of the prohibitions on recouping licence and CoS costs to non-Skilled Worker routes, a definition of ‘associated administrative costs’, and some other changes. The revised Sponsor a Skilled Worker guidance has details of how the new care worker recruitment requirement, which was introduced from the same date by HC 733, will apply.

The ability and willingness of the sponsor of a pension scheme to meet the pension promises it has made to its employees.

A declaration submitted by a sponsor to the FCA as required under LR 8.4.3 R (Application for listing), LR 8.4.9 R (Further application for listing), LR 8.4.13 R (Production of circular) or LR 8.4.14 R (Transfer between listing category).

Immigration analysis: In R (on the application of) Prestige Social Care Services Ltd v Secretary of State for the Home Department (‘Prestige Social Care Services Ltd’), the High Court considers, for the first time in a fully reasoned judgment applying the post 2024 Sponsor Guidance, whether Annex C1 Ground (z) (‘non genuine roles’) always requires dishonesty or other reprehensible conduct, and how that ground interacts with Annex C2(a)–0(b), C1.44 (‘genuine vacancy’) and section 31(2A) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981). His Honour Judge Tindal holds that the examples of non genuine roles in Ground (z) and paras C1.46–C1.47 do entail dishonesty or other reprehensible conduct and so attract the Balajigari v SSHD/Prestwick Care Ltd v SSHD fairness safeguards, but that outside those examples, UKVI can treat a role as non genuine where, focusing on the vacancy rather than the worker, it lacks one or more of the C1.44 characteristics, even without dishonesty, subject to ordinary public law fairness para [55]. The court finds the Home Office’s reliance on Ground (z) irrational on the specific facts (Ms K’s inability to drive), but upholds revocation under Annex C2(a) and (b) and refuses relief under SCA 1981, s 31(2A), applying the Court of Appeal’s approach in R (Bradbury) v Brecon Beacons NPA and R (Gathercole) v Suffolk CC [90]–[98]. The claim is dismissed, permission to appeal refused and costs of £18,000 awarded to the Secretary of State paras [99]–[100]. Written by Nazib Ullah, partner at Internations Legal LLP.

Immigration analysis: The High Court quashed the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD)’s decision to revoke Moon Fish Ltd’s sponsor licence, holding that Annex C1(aa) of the Sponsor Guidance did not clearly make legitimate unpaid leave resulting in lower salary payments a mandatory ground for revocation. Although the failure to report the absence and reduced payment could engage a non-mandatory ground, the SSHD had also acted procedurally unfairly by failing to identify the specific concern and give the sponsor a reasonable opportunity to respond. The decision confirms that procedural fairness ordinarily applies even where the Home Office considers a mandatory revocation ground to be established. Sponsors should maintain effective reporting systems, while practitioners should scrutinise whether the Home Office has properly characterised an alleged breach and afforded a fair opportunity to respond. Produced in partnership with Irfan Ali of Excello Law.

A service relating to a matter referred to in LR 8.2 that a sponsor provides or is requested or appointed to provide, including preparatory work that a sponsor may undertake before a decision is taken as to whether or not it will act as sponsor for a listed company or applicant or in relation to a particular transaction, and including all the sponsor's communications with the FCA in connection with the service.

Immigration analysis: In this analysis, Liz Hunter and Roberta Imperial of Mishcon de Reya consider the risks facing employers of sponsored workers. As visa sponsorship rules tighten and immigration salary thresholds affect whether individuals can be sponsored to work in the UK, employers face two related risks. Paying immigration costs may create an unexpected benefit-in-kind (BIK) tax liability, and may create or expose differences in pay between employees performing the same role.

Forthcoming developments:  In December 2025 the Migration Advisory Committee published its review of the salary requirements for work visas, which includes a recommendation that the general and occupation-specific salary thresholds in the Senior or Specialist route should both be set at the median earnings of eligible occupations. For the Graduate Trainee route, the Committee proposes a single salary threshold of £33,400 aligned with the Skilled Worker new entrant rate and recommends abolishing occupation-specific rates.  See: LNB News 17/12/2025 33. Senior or Specialist Worker and Graduate Trainee are Global Business Mobility routes which replaced, respectively, the Intra-Company Transfer and Intra-Company Graduate Trainee routes from 11 April 2022. The Senior or Specialist Worker route enables businesses with linked entities overseas to transfer established employees to work in their UK offices in a skilled role. It is classed as a Worker route, for the purposes of relevant sponsorship fees. Partners in business structures such as limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are treated as employees for these purposes. The route is set out in the Immigration Rules,