Family analysis: James Hasson, barrister at Park Square Barristers, examines a Family Court decision in Re H (care and adoption: assessment of wider family) that although the father of a child who was currently subject to an interim care order did not want the local authority to inform his parents of the existence of the child, it was in the child’s best interests for the wider paternal family to be notified.

Local government analysis: Alexander Line, a barrister practising from Outer Temple Chambers examines the implications of R (on the application of JF acting through his mother and litigation friend KF) v London Borough of Merton, and says the case serves as a successful example of a challenge to a care assessment using section 1 of the Care Act 2014 (CA 2014) as a litigation tool.

The power to disapply the primary limitation period When dealing with personal injury claims that fall within section 11 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), the court has a discretion to disapply the primary limitation period even though a claim has not been brought in time (ie to allow the claim to continue even though more than three years have elapsed before it was brought). This discretion applies to all personal injury claims in negligence, nuisance and breach of duty. It also applies to claims in respect of defective products brought under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (but those are subject to a further long-stop limitation period of ten years that cannot be set aside). The court may disapply the limitation period and allow a claim proceed where it would be equitable to do so. Practitioners should note that the Crime and Policing Act 2026 inserted LA 1980, ss 11ZA and 11ZB, meaning that separate provisions apply to qualifying claims for personal injuries

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: Kavan Gunaratna, barrister at Enterprise Chambers, examines the details of Re VE Interactive Ltd, a case which involved a pre-packaged sale of the company’s business and which illustrates the court’s powers to remove administrators.

Section 188 of the Enterprise Act 2002 (EnA 2002) makes it a criminal offence for an individual to agree with one or more other persons that two or more undertakings will engage in certain prohibited cartel arrangements. This includes price-fixing, market-sharing, limitation of production or supply and bid-rigging. The offence applies in respect of agreements both to make or implement such arrangements and also to cause such arrangements to be made or implemented. The criminal offence will be committed irrespective of whether the agreement reached is actually implemented by the undertakings. There are a number of defences available. See further, The UK criminal cartel offence. Both the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and the UK’s Serious Fraud Office (SFO) have the power to investigate individuals suspected of involvement in the criminal cartel offence under EnA 2002, s 188. Under EnA 2002, s 190, proceedings for the criminal cartel offence may only be instituted: • by the Director of the SFO (the Director), or • by or with the consent of the CMA The

Note: Although the Academies Act 2010 (AcA 2010) does apply in Wales, the provisions for the creation new academies or free schools apply only in England. As such, this Practice Note applies to England only. One of the vaunted advantages of an academy or free school over a maintained school is an element of free choice in the curriculum. The choice for the school is not entirely free, of course, but these things are relative. The curriculum generally AcA 2010, s 1A(1)(b) (as amended) requires an academy or free school to satisfy the requirements of section 78 of the Education Act 2002 (EA 2002) (which would otherwise apply only at maintained schools): '…a balanced and broadly based curriculum which promotes the spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and physical development of pupils at the school and of society, and prepares pupils at the school for the opportunities, responsibilities and experiences of later life.' The Model Funding Agreement for free schools usually adds

The Basic Curriculum in England The basic curriculum in England includes: • religious education • relationships education for all registered pupils at primary school • relationships and sex education for all registered pupils in secondary school and registered pupils provided with secondary education in special school • the National Curriculum, and • health education Collective worship On each school day, but not necessarily at the start, pupils at maintained schools (including special schools) may take part in collective worship, either all together or in different age or school groups, and on the school premises. On special occasions, the governing body may, after consultation with the headteacher, arrange for it to take place elsewhere. The arrangements for collective worship are made differently depending on the type of school in question: • at community schools and foundation schools without a religious character, by the headteacher after consulting the governing body • at foundation schools with a religious character and at voluntary schools, the arrangements are to be made by the governing

The rules relating to possession claims are found in CPR Part 55 and specific rules for the accelerated possession claims of properties let of assured shorthold tenancies are found in Section II. For an overview of the CPR Part 55 procedure, see Practice Note: Drafting notes for claim form in section 21 standard possession proceedings for bringing a claim for possession based on a section 21 notice. Accelerated possession procedure The conditions for applying for possession using

Practice Compliance analysis: In what circumstances can a casual conversation turn in to legal advice? Our panel of experts consider how lawyers can navigate around the perils of informal advice.

This Practice Note offers an introduction to the dark web. It explains what the dark web is and discusses legal and illegal activities and concepts notoriously present on it. This Practice Note does not consider in detail legal issues arising in connection with the policing or commission of criminal activities on the dark web. What is the dark web? The part of the internet known as the dark web is frequently portrayed in the media as being a wholly nefarious criminal underground that is exclusively the preserve of drug dealings and other illegalities. The reality is a little more nuanced. The surface web, which anyone can easily access, by some accounts only covers a small proportion of the internet. The deep web, ie the portion of the internet closed off to the public and not indexed by search engines, mostly comprises pages controlled by organisations and governments and is by far the largest portion of the internet (it is often estimated to make up around 90% of it). The dark web, the section of the internet

Commercial analysis: In the case of Ayhan Sezer v Agroinvest, HHJ Pearce, sitting as a judge of the High Court in the London Circuit Commercial Court, had to grapple with the apparent tension between an obiter dictum of Lord Sumption in Bunge SA v Nidera and earlier decisions of the courts setting out the approach to the identification of the date of default for the purposes of the Grain and Feed Trade Association (GAFTA) standard form default clause in the context of a claim for damages based on an anticipatory (and not actual) repudiatory breach of contract. This tension was well-known to international trade and commodities practitioners, and the point under consideration had arisen in previous GAFTA disputes. The case, therefore, represents much needed judicial clarity on this important issue. Written by Paul Toms KC barrister at Quadrant Chambers.

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. With effect from 1 April 2017, the worldwide debt cap rules have been repealed and replaced by the corporate interest restriction (CIR) rules. The worldwide debt cap rules outlined in this Practice Note should therefore only apply to periods prior to 1 April 2017, the date that the CIR rules came into force. In respect of any periods straddling that date, the debt cap rules should apply to the notional period ending on 31 March 2017. For more information on the CIR, which replaces and repeals the debt cap rules, see Practice Note: Corporate interest restriction. Tax relief for the financing expenses of UK resident companies which are member of large groups may be restricted (ie disallowed) where, broadly, the amount of the group's net debt based in the UK exceeds more than 75% of the group's gross debt (known as the gateway test). The debt cap applies to periods of account commencing on or after 1 January