Banking & Finance analysis: Becky Bradley, senior counsel at Wells Fargo Legal Department, discusses the impact of coronavirus (COVID-19) on the debt capital markets and sets out what debt capital markets practitioners should be doing now to prepare for potential issues in the future.

Businesses are constantly looking for ways to improve performance and effective pricing can be instrumental in improving the bottom line. This Practice Note provides an introduction to pricing in law firms and contains guidance on some key considerations for any firm wanting to move towards a more sophisticated pricing model. Pricing is an area worthy of focus in any business—the link between pricing and profitability recurs both anecdotally and in more detailed analysis. Although the results of improving pricing strategies and tactics will vary enormously, one study suggested that pricing has two to four times the potential to influence profitability relative to other business levers. Firms that identify and actively pursue pricing as an important part of their strategy typically outperform industry peers that do not have a pricing focus across a number of key financial metrics, eg return on equity and net profit. Firms that are working towards pricing improvement are also proven to benefit significantly compared to peers that are not, even if the pricing program they are undertaking is still

The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has conducted a study on the likelihood of male consumers to purchase counterfeit goods which are endorsed by social media influencers. The study found that 35% of males aged 16 to 60 are knowing buyers of counterfeits, with 31% influenced by social media endorsements. 24% of males are prompted by social media endorsements to buy counterfeit and 7% are counterfeit hunters who use social media postings to assist in their searches. The study also found that key factors which influence counterfeit purchasing decisions are trusting complicit influencers, rationalisations, risk blindness and risk appetite, and younger generations are more susceptible to these influences. The IPO has assessed these results and issued some recommendations to disrupt the social influences that culminate deviant purchasing.

Overview of legislation and key M&A considerations The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR) became directly applicable and fully enforceable in all EU Member States from 25 May 2018. It introduced substantial amendments to EU data protection law and replaced Directive 95/46/EC (the Data Protection Directive). The EU GDPR applies to the processing of personal data, provides rights to those data subjects whose data is processed and imposes obligations on both controllers and processors of the personal data. The EU GDPR is complex and principles-based. There are seven data protection principles that form the core of the EU GDPR, with which controllers that handle personal data must comply. These core principles are set out in Article 5. They are discussed in Practice Note: EU GDPR—data protection principles. Personal data and technology are increasingly important aspects of most businesses as the majority of businesses process information about employees, customers/clients, suppliers, etc. Data is a valuable and strategic corporate asset and can therefore be critical to the valuation of a

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. The Financial Services Act 2012 (FSA 2012) provided a new framework for financial regulation in the UK from 1 April 2013 and replaced the Financial Services Authority with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA). The FCA was established as an independent conduct of business regulator with a strategic objective of ensuring that the relevant markets function well and operational objectives focused on market integrity, consumer protection and effective competition. The FCA was, amongst other things, charged with exercising functions under Part VI of FSMA 2000 as the UK listing authority. This Practice Note looks at the impact the FSA 2012 had on functions relating to listing under the FSMA 2000, Pt 6 rules. It states the law as at 1 April 2013. Links are provided to sources, texts and relevant content.. What provisions of the FSA 2012 are relevant to this issue? • FSA 2012, s 6 inserts a new Part

Property analysis: In this analysis, Andrew Butler KC of Tanfield Chambers considers (a) the impact of the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025 (T(PP)A 2025) on property owners; (b) the impact on landlords and tenants and how the responsibilities and duties should be divided between them; and (c) how, if at all, this will impact lease drafting.

EU GDPR and UK GDPR The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR) became directly applicable and fully enforceable in all EU Member States from 25 May 2018. It introduced substantial amendments to EU data protection law and, in the UK, it replaced the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998) and Directive 95/46/EC (the Data Protection Directive). On 31 January 2020, the UK ceased to be an EU Member State and entered an implementation period, during which it continued to be subject to EU law. The EU GDPR regime was applicable under UK law until the end of the implementation period (11 pm UK time on 31 December 2020) and remains applicable in the EEA. The UK General Data Protection Regulation, Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (UK GDPR) regime is applicable under UK law from the end of the implementation period (as the Retained Regulation (EU) 2016/679, UK GDPR from the end of the implementation period and as the Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679, UK GDPR from 1 January 2024). Assimilated law is the name given to retained EU law

IP analysis: Michael Smith of Three Stone Chambers considers the impact of Brexit on the UK's regime for the exhaustion of IP rights. In particular, he looks at the UK Government's response to the consultation on the UK’s future exhaustion of IP rights regime launched in 2021. The response was published in May 2025.

EU Law analysis: The Revised EU Product Liability Directive makes it easier for consumers to bring product liability claims, extends its scope to software and AI integrated products, eases the burden of proof and sets out new disclosure rules to balance consumer protection against the potential and challenges of advancing technologies, including automated vehicles (AVs). We set out in this article what AV manufacturers selling products in the EU need to know about the new product liability rules and how they can mitigate increasing product liability risks. Written by Katie Chandler and Florian Lambrach (partners), Joe Pengelly (associate), and Dr. Philipp Behrendt (head) of Taylor Wessing's German Disputes and Investigations team.

TMT analysis: the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) has published the government’s response to the 2022 consultation on the draft legislation on the implementation of advertising restrictions for less healthy food and drink on television and online. Katrina Anderson, Principal Associate of Mills & Reeve, analyses this development.

Environment analysis: The Water (Special Measures) Bill was introduced in an attempt to strengthen the power of the industry regulators. It was introduced on 4 September 2024 and is currently on its second reading in the House of Lords. Amy Taylor, Barrister, and Dr Michael J Bowes, Pupil, at Six Pump Court, comment on the Bill.

Demonstrating an employer has breached its duty of good faith is no easy matter. The implied duty of good faith (known as the implied duty of trust and confidence in the contractual context) was first established in a pensions context in Imperial Group Pensions Trust v Imperial Tobacco (Imperial) in 1991 and has been developed in subsequent cases. A modern restatement emerged in the High Court decision in the Prudential case in 2011. As the judge stated in Prudential, the duty of good faith cannot be 'freeze-framed' at the date of the Imperial decision. However, while the duty has developed over time, it is now accepted that the 2014 High Court case IBM v Dalgleish went a step too far when it decided on the facts that the employer had breached its duty of good faith. This high watermark of the duty of good faith has significantly receded since then. Indeed, in August 2017, the Court of Appeal reversed almost the entirety of IBM