Corporate Crime analysis: This appeal concerned the application of section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003 (CA 2003) to private consensual messaging, namely offensive messages exchanged between serving police officers in a private WhatsApp group. This is the first time that the higher courts have been asked to consider section 127(1) in this context. The appeal was dismissed. The court held that the messages exchanged between the officers were of a ‘grossly offensive’ nature within the meaning of section 127(1)(a), and that a reasonable person in society would find them to be so, applying the standards of an open, just, multiracial and multifaith society. Written by Eleanor Fox, barrister at 2 Hare Court.

The inheritance tax (IHT) treatment of the legacy will depend on all the facts and circumstances of the case (in particular, the drafting of the Will, the nature of the property being transferred and the nature of the beneficiaries). For example, it may be the case that the legacy establishes an interest in possession

FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to the tax treatment of carried interest: Following a call for evidence on the tax treatment of carried interest that ran over summer 2024, at Autumn Budget 2024 the government announced that it would introduce a revised tax regime for carried interest from 6 April 2026 that would sit within the income tax framework, subject to special rules to take account of the unique characteristics of the reward. A consultation on potential new qualifying conditions for access into the new regime followed, with a government response to this being issued in June 2025. Draft legislation for the new tax regime for carried interest was published on 21 July 2025, for inclusion in Finance Bill 2026. The new rules will have effect for carried interest arising on or after 6 April 2026. All this was confirmed at the Budget on 26 November 2025, where it was also noted that some changes had been made to the draft legislation to reflect stakeholder feedback. Pending the coming into force of the new regime,

The rules relating to the form of indictments and the procedure for their creation and adoption are contained in the following: • the Indictments Act 1915 (IA 1915) • section 2 of the Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1933 (AJ(MP)A 1933), and • Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, Pts 3, 10 and 25 For information on what an indictment must contain, its form, dealing with defects and amending indictments, see Practice Note: The indictment—content, form, defects and amendments. What is an indictment? An indictment is the formal document containing the list of charges against a defendant which is preferred (formally served) in the Crown Court. This is a different document to the written charge or information produced by the prosecution in order to commence the prosecution in the magistrates' court. See Practice Notes: Commencing criminal proceedings—applying for the issue of a summons and Commencing criminal proceedings—written charge and requisition or single justice procedure notice. The indictment is traditionally drafted by the prosecutor, eg the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) or other prosecuting authority. In practice, this

For an explanation on what an indictment is and when an indictment is required as well as information on the electronic generation of draft indictments and preferring an indictment, see Practice Note: The indictment. Contents of an indictment The general rules for an indictment are set out in rule 10.2 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 , SI 2025/909 (CrimPR 2025) and sections 3–5 of the Indictments Act 1915 (IA 1915). The essential requirements are: • the indictment must be in writing • the indictment must be in one of the prescribed forms unless the Crown Court orders otherwise or the draft indictment is electronically generated in accordance with CrimPR 2025, SI 2025/909, r 10.3 • at the head of the document, set out the date of that document and a statement that it contains (as appropriate): ◦ the first indictment in the case ◦ a proposed amended indictment ◦ a substituted indictment ◦ an additional indictment ◦ a trial indictment, or ◦ an indictment required by CrimPR 2025, SI

Information Law analysis: The High Court held that the public interest (or ‘iniquity’) defence, as recognised in ‘traditional’ breach of confidence claims, is available in claims for misuse of private information and claims for breach of confidence even where the information was unlawfully received by the defendants. The court held that the same facts being proved will potentially serve as a defence in both kinds of claim. Written by Phil Hartley, senior legal advisor at Schillings International LLP.

Dispute Resolution analysis: All lawyers know the principle of, and no doubt regularly rely on legal professional privilege (LPP). It is a corner stone of the English legal system. However, LPP is not apposite to protect against participation (active or passive) in the commission of fraud. This principle has somewhat inelegantly been described as the ‘iniquity exception’: inelegant because it is not an exception (strictly speaking) and rather than applying to iniquity it is applicable in all species of fraud, spanning both criminal and civil jurisdictions. Al Sadeq v Dechert LLP provided the Court of Appeal with an opportunity to explore the operation and scope of the iniquity principle in the context of LPP. The case is also a fascinating (if hotly contested) exposé of the Emirate of Ras Al Khaimah (‘RAK’), one of the United Arab Emirates. Written by Lauren Godfrey, barrister at Gatehouse Chambers.

What effect does insolvency have on the operation of a lease? This Practice Note seeks to answer that question and address to some of the most common concerns which may arise on the introduction of an insolvency practitioner (IP) to the landlord and tenant relationship in relation to commercial premises. Types of insolvency process It should be noted that the insolvency process depends on where the tenant is located (eg its registered office in the case of a corporate entity) and not the location of the leased premises. For the purposes of this Practice Note, it is assumed that both the landlord and tenant are based in Scotland and that the lease is governed by Scots law. The main formal insolvency processes in Scotland are set out below. Corporate Administration Administration is a process that operates to provide a framework for the rescue of an insolvent company. An administrator will be appointed and, while the company continues to exist, it will act by its administrator. Administrators

Introduction to SPVs What is an SPV? 'SPV' stands for 'special purpose vehicle'. An SPV is a body corporate, usually with limited liability, which is specially-incorporated for the purpose of a structured finance transaction in a jurisdiction and with an ownership structure which for tax, regulatory and/or accounting reasons result in favourable treatment for the transaction for which it has been set up. SPE (special purpose entity) and SPC (special purpose company) refer to essentially the same concept. (SPV, SPE and SPC can also refer to the terms 'single purpose vehicle', 'single purpose entity' and 'single purpose company' respectively). Under Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 (EU Securitisation Regulation) and UK securitisation rules, SPVs are referred to as securitisation special purpose entities (SSPEs). SPVs are most often used as financing vehicles (typically, issuers of securities) in structured finance transactions (such as repackagings) and securitisations and therefore 'issuer' and 'SPV' become somewhat interchangeable terms as a matter of market practice. For general introductions to repackagings and securitisations, see Practice Notes: Introductory guide to repackagings

Dispute Resolution analysis: In a recent decision, Master Brightwell considered a question which appears not to have been previously decided, as to the construction of section 1 of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 (CL(C)A 1978) and its interaction with the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 (TP(RAI)A 2010). That question was whether the professional indemnity insurer of an insolvent insured is to be treated in law as being liable in respect of the same damage as that for which its insured is liable, for the purpose of enabling the insurer to pursue a claim to recover a contribution pursuant to CL(C)A 1978. Written by Sarah Prager KC, barrister at Deka Chambers.

Family analysis: This judgment shows the court adopting a highly structured approach to the determination of questions of property law prior to the determination of a financial remedy application against a backdrop of bankruptcy proceedings, procedural and evidential confusion and limited involvement of lawyers until a late stage. It is also a user-friendly reminder of the court's approach to common intention constructive trusts and the quantification of beneficial interests in a sole legal owner case.

Law360, London: Promoting diversity in international arbitration enhances the quality, legitimacy and relevancy of the arbitral process and the resulting awards. This article explores the current statistical data on participants' gender, geographic origin or nationality, and age in the international arbitration community; recent diversity initiatives; and strategies for fostering diversity.