The table below provides a high-level summary of the reliefs available under the regimes for venture capital trusts (VCTs), the enterprise investment scheme (EIS) and the seed enterprise investment scheme (SEIS). The table compares the main tax reliefs under the VCT, EIS and SEIS regimes, as well as highlighting some of the main differences in the conditions that must be met for the schemes to apply. The table is a reference guide to be used alongside other material and sources. It does not aim to cover all of the details of the reliefs and conditions covered, nor does it list all of the conditions, exclusions and anti-avoidance rules which apply in the context of the SEIS, EIS and VCT schemes. For overviews of those topics and links to relevant Practice Notes providing more detail, see: • SEIS relief—overview • EIS relief—overview • Venture capital trusts—overview The table reflects the following changes made by sections 14 and 15 of the Finance Act 2026 (FA 2026), which, with effect from 6 April 2026: • reduced the upfront income tax relief

A company whose shares are listed on an EU-regulated market and which complies with various other requirements. An individual investor in a venture capital trust is entitled to 30% income tax relief on the amount invested up to £200,000 provided that the investor's venture capital trust shares are held for at least five years. Investors in venture capital trusts also receive an exemption from capital gains tax on any gains on the sale of the venture capital trust's shares and exemption from income tax on dividends from the venture capital trust.

Where a case may be commenced A chapter 11 case may be commenced in the district court for the district in which the domicile, residence, principal place of business in the US, or principal assets in the US, of the person or entity that is the subject of the case has been located for the 180 days immediately preceding commencement or has been located in such district for a longer portion of such 180 day period than in any other district (28 U.S.C. § 1408). Further: • for business entities, domicile means the place of organisation or incorporation (see: In re Dunmore Homes 380 BR 663 670 (Bankr SDNY 2008) (not reported by LexisNexis®)) • courts either find that the place of organisation or incorporation of a business entity is also its residence or that the term residence as used in the bankruptcy venue statute is a term that applies only to individuals and not business entities (see: In re Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Pub. Co. 474 BR 122 135 (Bankr SDNY 2012) (not reported by LexisNexis®))

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 25 August 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and commentary. Case facts Outline UK merger investigation into the completed acquisition by Veolia Environment S.A. of a minority shareholding in Suez S.A. and the anticipated public takeover bid by Veolia Environment S.A. of the remaining share capital of Suez S.A. The parties overlap in the supply of water treatment and waste management services to municipal and industrial customers. Latest developments On 25 August 2022, the CMA issued its final report in its phase 2 investigation, finding that the transaction has resulted, or may be expected to result, in an SLC in the supply of seven markets within the waste and water management services sector the UK. To remedy the SLC, the CMA decided that the most effective remedy was the complete divestment of three businesses (ie to unwind the transaction). Parties • Veolia Environment S.A. (Veolia): Veolia is a French group active in France and worldwide mainly in the sectors related

A verdict is the tribunal of fact’s formal decision at the end of a trial on each charge or issue-most commonly whether the accused is guilty or not guilty (and, in Scotland, not proven). In jury trials the jury returns the verdict; in judge‑alone or summary proceedings the court records an equivalent finding. The term itself is descriptive rather than defined exhaustively in statute, but its form and delivery are governed by jury legislation, criminal procedure rules and case law.Key features include:- It resolves guilt or liability; sentencing or decree follows separately.- It is given on each count/issue and must be clearly recorded in open court.- Unanimous or majority requirements are jurisdiction‑specific: England & Wales and Northern Ireland permit majority verdicts under statute; Scotland’s 15‑member juries return verdicts by simple majority; Ireland permits statutory majority verdicts. - Special verdicts exist, notably verdicts relating to insanity/mental disorder, and procedures where an accused is unfit to plead (leading to alternative findings rather than a conventional verdict).Usage is broadly consistent across the UK and Ireland. In civil cases, “verdict” refers to a jury’s finding (e.g., in defamation), whereas most civil outcomes are framed as judgments or decrees. Terms such as directed acquittal and no case to answer affect whether a verdict is required.

The process by which a document relating to an IPO or offer'>secondary offer (for example, a prospectus or admission document) is checked to ensure that all the content is true, accurate and not misleading. The purpose of the verification exercise is to protect those who have responsibility for the document and culminates in a written record usually referred to as ‘verification notes’ supporting the statements made in the document.

The purpose of the verification exercise is to protect those who have responsibility for the publication of public documents (such as the information memorandum in an auction sale) by demonstrating the process that they have gone through to establish the truth and accuracy of information contained in the relevant document. It is a process that culminates in a written record, referred to as the verification notes, supporting statements made in the information memorandum.

This Practice Note covers how information contained in a document or statement made by or on behalf of a person, can be relied on where there is a requirement to validate its authenticity in a commercial context. There are a number of ways to validate information and documents and this Practice Note explains when statutory declarations, oaths, affirmations and affidavits may be used; how to check that these have been correctly prepared, and includes guidance for practitioners when using these methods of validation. This Practice Note looks at the requirements for the following: • Statutory declarations • Oaths • Affirmations • Affidavits • Formalities for administering statutory declarations, oaths, affirmations and affidavits • Statutory declarations and affidavits out of jurisdiction For information on notaries, their purpose, steps required to notarise a document and the meaning of legalisation, see Practice Note: Notaries and notarisation. For guidance on certified copies, including what a certified copy is, when is a certified copy required, who can certify a document, what format the certification should take, use of certified copies

Purpose The primary purpose of the verification exercise is to protect the directors who have responsibility for the content of the offer documentation by demonstrating the process that they have gone through to establish the truth and accuracy of information contained in the relevant document. It is a process that usually culminates in a written record, referred to as the verification notes, supporting statements made in the offer documentation. Who does what? On a recommended offer where the offeree board circular forms part of the offer document, the verification exercise is usually co-ordinated by the offeror's lawyers with the offeree's lawyers providing input on those sections of the offer document for which the offeree directors are accepting responsibility. Where a separate offeree board circular is prepared, the offeree's lawyers will co-ordinate the verification of that document. The lawyers will work closely with their clients on the verification exercise and it is common for the directors to delegate responsibility to a committee. This does not, however, absolve the directors who remain ultimately responsible for the contents of

This Practice Note provide practical guidance on the verification visit that may occur in an anti-dumping investigation. It provides guidance on the information that is likely to be verified as well as the information that will be verified. Introduction The World Trade Organization’s Agreement on the Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (the ‘Anti-dumping Agreement’) requires that an investigating authority satisfies itself as to the accuracy of the information supplied by interested parties. Article 6.7 provides one manner in which the investigating authorities may satisfy themselves as to the accuracy of the information of such supplied information. Article 6.7 allows an investigating authority, should it choose to do so, to conduct a verification visit. For guidance on the legalities of such verification visits as well as the procedures, see Practice Note: Evidence in anti-dumping investigations. What information will be verified? Investigating authorities would provide a letter to the interested party being verified ahead of the actual verification visit. Such practice complies with Annex I of the Anti-dumping

Ireland-Commercial analysis: This article was written by Aoife Mac Ardle, of counsel (Technology and Innovation), Omotola Ilori, associate (Technology and Innovation), Colin Rooney, partner (Technology and Innovation), Olivia Mullooly, partner (Intellectual Property), Ian Duffy, partner (Technology and Innovation) and Rachel Benson, senior professional support lawyer (Technology and Innovation), of Arthur Cox LLP. On 3 June 2026, the Irish High Court delivered its judgment on the appeal by TikTok Technology Limited (TikTok) against the decision of the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) dated 30 April 2025 finding that TikTok had infringed international transfer and transparency requirements under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine has adopted the Law on Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine on Expanding the Competence of International Arbitration. The Law sets out revised wording concerning disputes that may be submitted to international commercial arbitration, including disputes arising from foreign trade and international economic relations, disputes involving enterprises with foreign investments, and disputes involving investors, states and intergovernmental organisations connected with investment activities. The Law also revises provisions concerning appointment, challenge and termination of arbitrators, and entered into force on 21 May 2026.