Moral rights in intellectual property provisions Intellectual property is an important issue in relation to construction projects. The parties that own the copyright in designs and specifications want to protect their rights—the parties who need to use the copyright material, both during the construction works and once the building/project is completed, want to make sure that they have adequate rights to do so without infringing copyright. See Practice Notes: Copyright in construction contracts and Copyright in a consultant's appointment for information on copyright matters in construction. It is standard practice, therefore, to include provision within a building contract, consultant appointment, collateral warranty or other construction contract which deals with intellectual property rights. Typically, a contractor/consultant/sub-contractor grants a licence to the party that it has contracted with, allowing that party to use the relevant copyright material for a broad list of purposes—usually including matters such as the construction, maintenance and repair of the works. Within such a copyright licence, the parties may

Case scenario: Where a contract states that Party A’s liability for breach is limited to the ‘price paid’, does this mean that Party A’s liability cap is the price which Party B has already paid at the date of the breach or can it also include sums which Party B is due to pay for other elements of the same contract, but at some future date. In answering this Q&A, we have assumed that the claim is for contractual damages. For information on types of damages, see the following Practice Notes: • Contractual damages—general principles, and • Damages

Rule 254 of the Land Registration Rules 1925, SI 1925/1093, on 12 October 2003, the day before its lapse on 13 October 2003, read as follows: ‘254 Entry of appurtenant right and its effect (1) If the Registrar is satisfied that the right is capable

FORTHCOMING CHANGE relating to the modernisation of stamp taxes on shares framework: Stamp duty and SDRT will, in 2027, be replaced with a single, self-assessed tax on transfers of securities, the securities transfer tax (STT) (formerly referred to as the securities transfer charge or STC), that will be paid (and reported) through electronic transfer systems such as CREST or, where appropriate, a new online portal. Draft legislation for the STT was published on 13 July 2026, along with explanatory notes, a policy paper and the outcome of the higher rate 1.5% stamp tax consultation. Subject to exemptions, the STT draft legislation includes a main charge of 0.5% for agreements to transfer chargeable securities to another person for consideration in money or money’s worth and, for transfers to a clearance service (CS) or depositary receipt issuer (DRI), a higher-rate charge of 1.5%. The main charge arises when an agreement is made or, in the case of a conditional agreement, when the conditions are satisfied, although, where the agreement is not electronic, the STT charge arises when the

IP analysis: Kelly Saliger, partner at CMS considers what the Barbie film means for Intellectual Property (IP) rights.

In 2021, nonfungible tokens (NFTs), digital humans and physics-informed AI were added to the 25 breakthrough technologies on Gartner’s emerging technologies hype cycle. These are the technologies identified as likely to have the most significant effect on business and society over the next two-to-ten years. The Hype Cycle (GHC) was initially published in 1995 by the information technology firm, Gartner, whereby a research group would collate notable analysis that highlighted recurrent patterns of ‘hype’ arising from new technologies or other innovations within the digital market. Essentially, the GHC reflects a graphic snapshot of how patterns of trends fluctuate, evolve and aid companies with managing their respective business targets efficiently. The emerging technologies GHC maps technologies on a curve, showing market expectation as against the predicted timescales within which they are expected to go from ‘Innovation Trigger’ to ‘Plateau of Productivity’, and mapping where each technology sits in relation to that timetable. Technologies

Scrutiny of an award by the ICC is a major feature of ICC arbitration, see Practice Note: ICC (2012)—the award. The ICC see scrutiny as a means of maximising the legal effectiveness of an award. In practice, however, practitioners often find that scrutiny delays delivery of the award. The ICC's response to this is that scrutiny reduces the requirement for an application for correction or interpretation of an award, thereby reducing wasted time and expense or the more serious situation of enforcement being refused. The ICC states that: it is rare than an award will not benefit from some scrutiny and some awards benefit enormously. To make the scrutiny process more efficient, the ICC introduced an ICC Award Checklist to be given to arbitrators when they receive a case and which they must consult before rendering their award to the ICC. Note that the checklist is not exhaustive. What are the ICC looking for when they scrutinise an award? The ICC's aim is to: • identify any defects that could be used to attempt

Corporate Crime analysis: In a bid to strengthen sanctions enforcement, the US Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the UK's Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) have recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Both authorities share a common mission to combat financial crime and ensure compliance, but they operate under distinct legal frameworks. Notably, the penalties imposed by OFSI remain significantly smaller compared to those imposed by OFAC. It appears that OFSI is seeking to draw insights from OFAC’s approach to enhance its own enforcement strategy. This partnership could signal a tougher stance on sanctions enforcement from OFSI, as well as closer alignment between the US and UK sanctions regimes. However, structural challenges persist within the UK, and without enhanced coordination among UK sanctions authorities, effective enforcement will remain difficult. John Binns, partner, and Magali Sharma, associate, at BCL Solicitors LLP explain the impact this MOU will have on the enforcement of financial sanctions.

Introduction to the Northern Ireland Protocol (Windsor Framework) The UK, including Northern Ireland (NI), is no longer part of the European Union (EU). However, the Republic of Ireland (ROI) remains within the EU. The UK and the EU agreed that there should not be new checks or controls on goods crossing the border between the ROI and NI. Thus, NI continues to follow EU rules for some regimes including agricultural and manufactured goods. NI also continues to enforce the EU’s customs code at its ports (as simplified by the Windsor Package). There are therefore, some new procedures and notification requirements for goods moving between NI and other parts of the UK. The Northern Ireland Protocol (NIP) was agreed as an integral part of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement which set the terms of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, in accordance with Treaty of the European Union, Article 50. It sought to address the challenges of Brexit on the island of Ireland, so that many of the changes that

What is the purpose of the Act? The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025 (T(PP)A 2025) puts public protection on a statutory footing so that operators of certain premises and organisers of specified events are required to plan for, and be prepared to respond to, a terrorist incident. It was introduced in response to the 2017 Manchester Arena attack and is commonly referred to as ‘Martyn’s Law’ in recognition of Martyn Hett, one of the victims of the bombing. T(PP)A 2025 introduces a tiered regime—all in-scope sites/events must have public protection procedures (evacuation, invacuation, lockdown, communication). Larger ‘enhanced’ sites/events must also implement proportionate public protection measures (monitoring, movement control, physical safety/security, security of information). The Security Industry Authority (SIA) is the regulator. When does the Act come into effect? T(PP)A 2025 received Royal Assent on 3 April 2025, but the operative duties are not yet in force. The UK government has set out an implementation period of at least 24 months with statutory

The expression 'tenant for the time being' means the person who is tenant under the lease at the given time—the incumbent tenant—as distinguished from a specified

Chaper 1 of Part I of the Housing Act 1980 (HA 1980) has been repealed. Housing Act 1985 (HA 1985) consolidates the Housing Acts (except those provisions consolidated in the Housing Associations Act 1985 and the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985), and certain related provisions. HA 1985, Pt V relates specifically to a secure tenant’s right to buy. HA 1985, Sch 6 sets out the easements and other rights that must be incorporated