Expert Analysis

• Why EU Ruling On Beneficial Ownership May Affect The UK

  

  Following the EU judgment in Sovim v. Luxembourg that public access to beneficial ownership information conflicts with data protection rights, several British overseas territories and dependencies have recently reversed their commitment to introduce unrestricted access, and challenges to the U.K.’s liberal stance may be on the cards, says Rupert Cullen at Allectus Law.

• Opinion

  Labour Should Reconsider Its Discrimination Law Plans

  

  While the Labour Party's recent proposals allowing equal pay claims based on ethnicity and disability, and introducing dual discrimination, have laudable intentions and bring some advantages, they are not the right path forward as the changes complicate the discrimination claim process for employees, say Colin Leckey and Tarun Tawakley at Lewis Silkin.

• AI Is Outpacing IP Law Frameworks

  

  In Thaler v. Comptroller-General, the U.K. Supreme Court recently ruled that artificial intelligence can't be an inventor, but the discussion on the relationship between AI and intellectual property law is far from over, and it's clear that technology is developing faster than the legal framework, says Stephen Carter at The Intellectual Property Works.

• Tracing The History Of LGBTQ+ Rights In The Workplace

  

  Pride History month is a timely reminder of how recent developments have shaped LGBTQ+ employees' rights in the workplace today, and what employers can do to ensure that employees are protected from discrimination, including creating safe workplace cultures and promoting allyship, say Caitlin Farrar and Jessica Bennett at Farrer.

• Ruling In FCA Case Offers Tips On Flexible Work Requests

  

  In Wilson v. Financial Conduct Authority, the Employment Tribunal recently found that the regulator's rejection of a remote work request was justified, highlighting for employers factors that affect flexible work request outcomes, while emphasizing that individual inquiries should be considered on the specific facts, say Frances Rollin, Ella Tunnell and Kerry Garcia at Stevens & Bolton.

• Pension Scheme Ruling Elucidates Conversion Issues

  

  In Newell Trustees v. Newell Rubbermaid UK Services, the High Court recently upheld a pension plan's conversion of final salary benefits to money purchase benefits, a welcome conclusion that considered several notable issues, such as how to construe pension deeds and when contracts made outside scheme rules can determine benefits, say Ian Gordon and Jamie Barnett at Gowling.

• New Fraud Prevention Offense May Not Make Much Difference

  

  By targeting only large organizations, the Economic Crime Act's new failure to prevent fraud offense is striking in that, despite its breadth, it will affect so few companies, and is therefore unlikely to help ordinary victims, says Andrew Smith at Corker Binning.

• Aldi Design Infringement Case Highlights Assessment Issues

  

  The forthcoming English Court of Appeal decision in Marks and Spencer v. Aldi, regarding the alleged infringement of design rights, could provide practitioners with new guidance, particularly in relation to the relevant date for assessment of infringement and the weight that should be attributed to certain design elements in making this assessment, say Rory Graham and Georgia Davis at RPC.

• Generative AI Raises IP, Data Protection And Contracts Issues

  

  As the EU's recent agreement on the Artificial Intelligence Act has fueled businesses' interest in adopting generative AI tools, it is crucial to understand how these tools utilize material to generate output and what questions to ask in relation to intellectual property, data privacy and contracts, say lawyers at Deloitte Legal.

• Decoding UK Case Law On Anti-Suit Injunctions

  

  The English High Court's forthcoming decision on an anti-suit injunction filed in Augusta Energy v. Top Oil last month will provide useful guidance on application grounds for practitioners, but, pending that ruling, other recent decisions offer key considerations when making or resisting claims when there is an exclusive jurisdiction clause in the contract, says Abigail Healey at Quillon Law.

• Litigation Funding Implications Amid Post-PACCAR Disputes

  

  An English tribunal's recent decision in Neill v. Sony, allowing an appeal on the enforceability of a litigation funding agreement, highlights how the legislative developments on funding limits following the U.K. Supreme Court's 2023 decision in Paccar v. Competition Appeal Tribunal may affect practitioners, say Andrew Leitch and Anoma Rekhi at BCLP.

• EU Product Liability Reforms Represent A Major Shakeup

  

  The recent EU Parliament and Council provisional agreement on a new product liability regime in Europe revises the existing strict liability rules for the first time in 40 years by easing the burden of proof to demonstrate that a product is defective, a hurdle that many had previously failed to overcome, say Anushi Amin and Edward Turtle at Cooley.

• Zimbabwe Ruling Bolsters UK's Draw As Arbitration Enforcer

  

  An English court's recent decision in Border Timbers v. Zimbabwe, finding that state immunity was irrelevant to registering an arbitration award, emphasizes the U.K.'s reputation as a creditor-friendly destination for award enforcement, say Jon Felce and Tulsi Bhatia at Cooke Young.

• Building Safety Ruling Offers Clarity On Remediation Orders

  

  The First-tier Tribunal's recent decision in Triathlon Homes v. Stratford Village Development, holding that it was just and equitable to award a remediation contribution order, will undoubtedly encourage parties to consider this recovery route for building defects more seriously, say lawyers at Simmons and Simmons.

• How AI Inventorship Is Evolving In The UK, EU And US

  

  While the U.K. Supreme Court's recent decision in Thaler v. Comptroller-General is the latest in a series of decisions by U.K., U.S. and EU authorities that artificial intelligence systems cannot be named as inventors in patents, the guidance from these jurisdictions suggests that patents may be granted to human inventors that use AI as a sophisticated tool, say lawyers at Mayer Brown.