means the information listed in Schedule [insert Schedule number] to this Agreement excluding any information which: (a) is, or was already known or available to [Party B], otherwise than pursuant to or through breach of any confidentiality obligation owed to [Party A]; (b) is, or will be, in the public domain other than through any breach of this Agreement (save that any publicly available information shall be classified as Confidential Information where it is compiled in a form that is not in the public domain); (c) is disclosed to [Party B] without any obligation of confidence to [Party A] by a third party who is not itself under or in breach of any obligation of confidentiality; (d) is developed by or on behalf of [Party B] in circumstances where the developing party has not had direct or indirect access to the information disclosed, provided that [Party B] provides satisfactory evidence of the same to [Party A]; and (e) [Party A] agrees in writing does not constitute Confidential Information.

For further practical guidance on the financing of energy, power and resources projects across a number of sectors, including those discussed in this Practice Note, see also textbook: Energy and Resources Financing: A Practical Handbook. Status of EU directives following Brexit Retained EU law (‘REUL’) is a legal concept describing EU-derived rights and legislation preserved by the UK following Brexit. It is a defined term under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (EU(W)A 2018), and the collective term given to the body of EU-derived laws the UK preserved and converted into domestic UK law, effective on the repeal of the European Communities Act 1972. Assimilated law is the name given to REUL which remains in force after the end of 2023 pursuant to the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023. The re-categorisation of REUL (and associated terms) to assimilated law reflects a change in its status and treatment under UK law, in that it is generally to be interpreted according to ordinary domestic law and principles. From 1 January 2024, REUL is ‘assimilated’ into

A interest'>carried interest economic model that looks at each investment separately. Where a 'deal-by-deal' approach is taken, the distribution waterfall is applied by reference to each investment. This type of economic model is more prevalent in the US and is in contrast to the ‘fund as a whole’ model.

Employment analysis: Employees are turning to generative AI to draft lengthy, ‘lawyerly’ grievances, putting strain on the HR teams asked to triage and respond to them. How should employers deal with the increased length and number of grievances, and what should they do about all those (sometimes dubious) case references?

Public Law analysis: The court found that a decision by the Minister for the Cabinet Office to directly award a contract for research to inform the government’s communications strategy during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic to the interested party, Public First, was unlawful. Public First had personal and professional connections to both the Minister himself and to Dominic Cummings (then special adviser to the Prime Minister). The judge accepted that the defendant had been entitled to rely on the truncated procedure under regulation 32(2)(c) of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015) to make the award, and accepted that the term of six months was not disproportionate. However, the use of regulation 32(2)(c) did not relieve the defendant of the requirement to conduct the procurement so as to demonstrate a fair and impartial process of selection. In the circumstances, the failure to consider any other research agency by reference to objective criteria gave rise to an appearance of bias. Written by Siân McGibbon, barrister at 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square.

Under Directive 2004/38/EC, the Citizens’ Directive, nationals of the European Economic Area (EEA), which comprises the EU Member States, Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein, benefit from EU free movement law. Throughout this Practice Note, the term 'EU citizens' which refers to EU Member States' nationals also includes EEA nationals. The Citizens’ Directive creates two additional categories of family members of EU nationals who are exercising treaty rights in another Member State. These are family members who do not meet the definition of direct ‘family members’, and are: • in a ‘durable relationship’ with an EU national, which is ‘duly attested’, or • ‘other family members’, who: ◦ were dependants or members of the household of the EU national prior to the EU national's coming to the host Member State, or ◦ have serious health grounds which strictly require their personal care by the EU national See Practice Note: Family members of EU nationals—definitions and rights of entry and residence

Commercial analysis: A case brought to the Court of Appeal challenging the High Court’s decision on the scope of fiduciary duty, informed consent and dishonesty. The court clarified that agents must fully disclose commissions (including the amount and method of funding) to avoid breaching fiduciary duties. Engie Power could only be liable as an accessory if dishonest and the court found the limitation period began when commission was paid, not when the contract was signed. The appeal was allowed in part. Written by Alexander Whatley, barrister at 3PB Chambers.

MLex: The European Commission said it is ‘high time’ AI providers ensure advanced models remain under control after incidents involving OpenAI agents. Meanwhile, EU Tech Commissioner Henna Virkkunen called for global rules after a report from Anthropic unveiled the risk of AI-fuelled biological weapons.

Immigration analysis: In an appeal by the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD), against a decision of the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chambers (‘UTIAC’), the Court of Appeal held that EEA citizens who have resided in the UK for more than ten years, can only be deported upon meeting the higher ‘imperative grounds of public security’ threshold. Past conduct can rarely serve such exclusion. Written by Parvez Anwar Pantho, caseworker at Duncan Lewis.

As you have noted, Practice Note: Contents of Wills—beneficiaries who can take under a Will provides that: 'In general, companies registered under the Companies Acts have the power to hold land and a bequest or a devise may be made to a registered company. A company registered under the Companies Acts may also receive a bequest of shares in that company without the shares needing to be vested in a nominee.' Unless there is a contrary

On first viewing, a Scots law building contract, professional appointment or collateral warranty would look very familiar to a practitioner with knowledge of English law versions of those documents. However, on closer inspection, it will become apparent that there are a number of (often subtle) differences which it is important to be aware of. This Checklist provides practical tips on how to convert an English law construction contract into one which is compliant with Scots law (also known as ‘kilting’ a contract). It is not intended to be exhaustive and assumes that the parties are using standard mid-market forms of construction contract which do not contain extensive project-specific drafting. Where such project drafting is included, there may be other differences between Scots law and English law which need to be taken into account. Execution issues • the concept of ‘execution as a deed’ does not exist in Scots law. Scots law documents are typically signed in ‘self-proving’ form in accordance with the Requirements of Writing (Scotland) Act 1995. Scots law documents are not dated at the beginning—instead

Employment analysis: The employer offered a voluntary savings scheme to its workers to assist with saving for holidays or Christmas which, in the case of some participating workers, resulted in them being paid below the National Minimum Wage (NMW). Since the deductions from the workers’ wages were paid into the employer’s bank account they were treated as being for the employer’s ‘own use and benefit’ for the purposes of regulation 12(1) of the NMW Regulations 2015 and therefore a deduction for NMW purposes, even though there was a requirement to pay the workers the amounts deducted as and when requested. Further, when the employer paid out the savings to the workers those payments did not constitute ‘additional remuneration’ for the purposes of section 17 of the NMW Act 1998 so did not go towards extinguishing or reducing its liability to pay them arrears of wages, according to the EAT.