Corporate Crime analysis: On 29 April 2020, the Fire Safety Bill had its second reading in the House of Commons and was sent to a Public Bill Committee. The Bill will amend the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 and provide greater clarity on the duties of the Responsible Person or duty-holder for multi-occupied, residential buildings. Hannah Eales, barrister and senior associate at Kingsley Napley, considers the provisions of the Bill in more detail.

Statutory framework There are currently three pension schemes in operation in England providing benefits for firefighters and they are collectively known as the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme. The three schemes are: • the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme 1992 (FPS 1992), which closed to new members with effect from 6 April 2006 and to future accrual with effect from 1 April 2022 • the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme 2006 (FPS 2006, or NFPS (the New Firefighters’ Pension Scheme)), which also closed to future accrual with effect from 1 April 2022 • the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme 2015 (FPS 2015), which came into effect on 1 April 2015 The FPS 1992 applied also to fire and rescue workers in Scotland and Wales. The FPS 2006 did not and separate new schemes were established by the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme (Scotland) Order 2007, SSI 2007/199 and the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme (Wales) Order 2007, SI 2007/1072. Similarly, in 2014 and 2015 separate new schemes were established for England, Scotland and Wales, known respectively as the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme 2015, the Firefighters’

Public Law analysis: In the first reported decision on specific disclosure under PA 2023, the High Court granted an unsuccessful bidder targeted disclosure of contemporaneous evaluation records for competing bids. Mr Justice Constable held that the claimant had sufficiently pleaded to unequal treatment under section 12 and that the documents were relevant to that existing issue. Although he questioned whether a separate prima facie threshold was required at this procedural stage, he found it satisfied in any event. The judgment indicates continuity with pre-Act procurement disclosure principles: information asymmetry may justify early disclosure where requests are focused and proportionate, while confidentiality can be managed through measures such as confidentiality rings, redaction and anonymisation. Produced in partnership with Ed Williams, partner, and Sam Pringle, senior associate, of DWF Law LLP.

The Tribunals system The Tribunals system is a dispute resolution service which supports, and is part of, the broader court system. It is administered by HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) and is governed by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (TCEA 2007). TCEA 2007, Pt 1 created a two-tier system, consisting of the First-tier Tribunals and the Upper Tribunals. A structure chart showing the tiers of tribunals, and where appeals may be made, is available on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website. The First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) (FTT) consists of judges and other members. A judge may be appointed to the FTT or may be transferred-in (for example if a function was previously performed by another body over which the FTT now has jurisdiction, and they were previously a member of that body, such as the rent assessment committee and the Adjudicator to HM Land Registry). Judges of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) (UT) are automatically deemed to be judges of the FTT. The Practice Direction: Panel composition in the First-tier

Football DataCo (FD) is a company that represents the data rights of the professional football leagues, and grants licences to third parties allowing them to reproduce certain IP such as fixture lists and statistics owned by the UK’s three professional football leagues. The English and Scottish Football leagues and FD brought various actions against sports data, pools and betting companies who made details of the fixture lists available to their users, including for betting services and online information services. The claims were based on copyright and database right infringement in the fixture lists. For the background to the history of the proceedings, including more on the factual background, see the Football Dataco v Stan James case. This Practice Note summarises the key points of the different proceedings. The Stan James action 11 February 2009—the action commenced The Stan James action was commenced on 11 February 2009 in the High Court. The initial claim included two separate complaints: • that the defendants were infringing copyright and/or database right in the fixture lists created by the claimants by publishing

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is no longer maintained. For information about US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, see Practice Note: The US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act 1977 (FCPA 1977) and Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) comparison table. As businesses eagerly expand into new markets looking for new growth opportunities, they must be careful, as with new growth comes new challenges. Particularly, multinational companies face the risk that one of their subsidiaries, affiliates, employees, or agents may engage in misconduct in violation of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The Department of Justice (DOJ) and Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) are emphasising enforcement of the FCPA and show no signs of slowing their pursuit of FCPA claims. To prevent, detect and remediate misconduct that may be in violation of the FCPA, in-house counsel and compliance professionals should be aware of any business areas exposed to risk and understand the conduct prohibited by the FCPA. Here, we provide an overview of the law, its application

An international format industry association dedicated to the protection and promotion of formats. Its members include format creators, producers, distributors, broadcasters and organisations with a commercial interest in the format business.

The Fraud Compensation Fund (FCF) was established as a statutory fund under section 188 of the Pensions Act 2004 (PeA 2004) for the purpose of providing compensation to the trustees or scheme managers of occupational pension schemes where the value of a scheme's assets has suffered a reduction attributable to an act or omission constituting an offence of dishonesty. The FCF is managed by the Board of the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) which was established under PeA 2004, s 107. For further information on the general operations of the PPF, see Practice Note: The Pension Protection Fund—an introduction. The obligation to make fraud compensation payments The PPF's obligation to make fraud compensation payments in respect of an occupational scheme arises under PeA 2004, Pt 2, Ch 4. The duty of the PPF to make fraud compensation payments is contained in PeA 2004, s 182. PeA 2004, s 182(1) provides that the PPF is required to make one or more fraud compensation payments in respect of an occupational pension scheme if:

Arbitration analysis: The French Cour de Cassation has confirmed the validity of an ICC tribunal in a dispute in which the underlying agreement specified arbitration under ICC or UNCITRAL rules, seated in New Delhi. The Cour de Cassation’s interpretation of the arbitration clause allowed for one party to initiate arbitration under either ICC or UNCITRAL rules without further mutual agreement. The case also touches on the interaction between insolvency proceedings and arbitration. The Cour de Cassation denied the intervention of a liquidator from India, finding that foreign insolvency decisions (such as those appointing a liquidator) do not automatically carry the same weight in France unless they are recognised (exequatur) under French law. Written by Sara Nadeau-Senguin, partner at Teynier Pic, Paris.

A general anti-abuse rule that counteracts tax advantages arising from abusive tax arrangements. It takes priority over other UK tax legislation and works in addition to specific anti-avoidance rules.

The general anti-abuse rule (the GAAR): • counteracts (by the making of adjustments on a just and reasonable basis by HMRC or the taxpayer) • tax advantages that would, ignoring the GAAR, arise from abusive tax arrangements, and • has applied since 17 July 2013 (the date of Royal Assent to the Finance Act 2013 (FA 2013)) except that, in respect of National Insurance contributions (NICs), it has only applied since 13 March 2014 This Practice Note discusses: • what the GAAR advisory panel is and its purpose • the interrelationship between the GAAR panel and the GAAR guidance, as well as the role of the GAAR guidance • the role of the GAAR panel's opinions in applying the GAAR not only to the specific tax arrangements that were referred to the GAAR panel, but also to equivalent tax arrangements entered into by other taxpayers without having to refer those arrangements to the panel as well, and • the potential impact of the panel's opinions If a taxpayer receives a protective GAAR notice, a notice of

The general anti-abuse rule (the GAAR): • counteracts (by the making of adjustments on a just and reasonable basis by HMRC or the taxpayer) • tax advantages that would, ignoring the GAAR, arise from abusive tax arrangements, and • has applied since 17 July 2013 (the date of Royal Assent to the Finance Act 2013 (FA 2013)) except that, in respect of National Insurance contributions (NICs), it has only applied since 13 March 2014 This Practice Note explains: • that the GAAR can be applied by taxpayers or HMRC • how to determine what adjustments to make to counteract abusive tax advantages • the procedure for counteraction by HMRC, including: ◦ the different types of notices that HMRC can give a taxpayer and the different GAAR procedures that relate to such notices ◦ the fact that adjustments specified in any such notice become final and the notice itself is treated as if it were given as a final GAAR counteraction notice if the taxpayer does not appeal against the making of the adjustments specified