Intellectual Property analysis: In a Dutch copyright infringement dispute revolving around the iconic Eames DSW chair the Court of Justice is asked to weigh in on important principles of international copyright law. The focus of the case lies on the material reciprocity test enshrined in the Berne Convention, which provides that works of applied art originating in countries where they are only protected as designs (ie the US) may not, in other signatory countries (ie Belgium and the Netherlands), also be granted copyright protection. In his Opinion of 5 September 2024, Advocate General Maciej Szpunar concluded that EU law precludes EU Member States from applying the material reciprocity test and, thus, from limiting copyright protection to works of applied art originating in the EU. This is significant as it clarifies that works of applied art originating from outside the EU may benefit from the same copyright protection as those originating from within the EU. If the Court of Justice follows this opinion, this would impact the harmonisation of copyright laws within the EU, ensuring broader protection for works of applied art and potentially influencing future legislative developments. Written by Alexander Hofmann, attorney-at-law at Baker McKenzie Austria, and Marlies Kittinger, junior associate at Baker McKenzie Austria.

Dispute Resolution analysis: This analysis explores the decision of Andrew Burrows QC, sitting as a judge of the High Court, and soon to be a Justice of the Supreme Court, at a conjoined hearing of two anti-suit injunction return dates. It will be of interest to any practitioner who might need to obtain or resist an anti-suit injunction for their clients. One of the most interesting aspects of this case is the basis upon which the judge continued Gunvor’s anti-suit injunction, which has arguably advanced forward the circumstances in which a party will be restrained from proceeding abroad outside of the context of a breach of a direct breach of an exclusive jurisdiction clause or arbitration agreement. Written by Oliver Caplin, barrister, at Twenty Essex, junior counsel for Gunvor in the title case.

Section 18(1)(j) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) states that the Court of Protection has power to make decisions regarding ‘the exercise of any power (including a power to consent) vested in P whether beneficially or as trustee or otherwise’. This provision would appear to include a power vested in P, as settlor

FORTHCOMING CHANGE : The Pensions Regulator (TPR) has launched a consultation on its new enforcement strategy, marking a shift towards more proactive and prudential regulation. The new draft enforcement strategy introduces a framework built around four key outcomes: prevention, reparation, accountability, and saver confidence supported by five strategic objectives focused on targeting key risks to savers, acting decisively against non-compliance and economic crime, using data to drive smarter enforcement, collaborating across the sector for greater impact, and enhancing transparency to build trust and improve conduct. The draft enforcement strategy aims to enhance TPR's ability to address emerging risks and non-compliance in the pensions sector through a more agile and collaborative approach. Consultation closure date: 11 November 2025. TPR intends to publish the final strategy and consultation response in early 2026. Later in 2026 TPR is also set to review its full suite of published policies following the strategy's implementation to ensure alignment, which may result in further consultations on any necessary changes. For further information, see: Consultation tracker—pensions. Under the Pensions

Information law analysis: In September 2024 the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology announced new plans to boost data centres and protect them from cyber threats and power outages, designating data centres as Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) alongside key facilities such as energy and water systems. Adam Richardson, Barrister, 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square discusses the background to this designation and its implications.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: Matthew Weaver, commercial chancery barrister at St Philips Stone Chambers, examines JCAM Commercial Real Estate Property XV Ltd v Davis Haulage Ltd and explains the practical lessons the case offers to practitioners.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: Joe Bannister, John Tillman and Margaret Kemp of Hogan Lovells examine the Lehman Brothers Europe Limited (LBEL) case and suggest the decision illustrates the courts are willing to adopt a pragmatic approach in assisting insolvency practitioners who need to act quickly in circumstances where their proposed actions are not expressly addressed in the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986).

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note explains the pensions tax regime and old Inland Revenue limits which applied before 6 April 2006 (A-day) and which may, to some extent, still be relevant today. It is not maintained. The pensions tax regime under the Finance Act 2004 came into effect on 6 April 2006, otherwise known as A-day. The pre A-day regime may still be of some relevance to schemes, many of which have retained some or all of the limits that applied under the older regime. This Practice Note focuses on the pre A-day tax regime. For further information on the tax regime after A-day (including transitional provisions included in the post A-day tax regime), see Practice Notes: • The Finance Act 2004, A-day and the pensions tax regime [Archived] • Tax treatment of pensions—an introduction • Allowance protections—quick guide • Normal minimum pension age and protected pension age • Pension commencement lump sums (PCLSs)—Protection of right to higher tax-free lump sum The Pension

This Practice Note details the pre-action protocols, referring to the Practice Direction Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (Practice Direction), as well as providing an overview of the various specific pre-action protocols which might be relevant to your dispute. It provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR. Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—see further below. For details on: • the reforms proposed by the Civil Justice Council following its review of the pre-action protocols, as well as any related developments discussed in subsequent Civil Procedure Rule Committee and Online Procedure Rule Committee meetings, see: Pre-action protocols—overview • the importance of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), see: ADR and dispute resolution clauses—overview and Mediation—overview • developments related to online dispute resolution, see: Starting and managing online claims—overview • general guidance on starting a claim, see: Starting a claim or counterclaim—overview What are pre-action protocols? The pre-action protocols set out the conduct the court will normally expect parties

Immigration analysis: Does the application of amendments to the Immigration Rules in 2010, which introduced a pre-entry English language test for partner applications, contravene article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)? Tony Muman of 43 Temple Row Chambers looks at the Supreme Court’s approach to this issue.

Note that the information in this Practice Note relates to the current law in England. The law in Wales in this area is covered by the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 and the related statutory instruments. See Practice Notes: Local authority powers and duties to provide accommodation for children in Wales, Local authority duties to looked after children in Wales and Local authority duties to children in Wales—child protection. NB: This Practice Note refers to previous legislation and statutory guidance as some of the links provide helpful context and some templates that are still used in pre-proceedings. Public law outline The pre-proceedings process was introduced in 2008 as the part of the Public Law Outline (PLO) reforms to care proceedings. It has been revised by the PLO 2014 and the Children and Families Act 2014, and there is now a 26-week time limit for the completion of care and supervision proceedings. See Practice Note: Public law children procedure—Public Law Outline. This places an increased emphasis on pre-proceedings work. The

The charity prescribed by order made by the Lord Chancellor (the same meaning as in s 194(8) of the LSA 2007)