This is the second article in our series examining common commercial landlord and tenant pitfalls. In our previous article, we explored the risks of allowing a commercial tenant to move into premises before a lease is formally completed. You can read that article here.
In June 2026, the Government launched its consultation, A Fairer End to Relationships, proposing significant reforms to the law governing relationship breakdown. One of the consultation’s key areas of focus is whether greater legal protection should be available to cohabiting couples, particularly those who own property together but are not married or in a civil partnership.
If you are a commercial landlord, you may have a potential tenant who is very keen to go into occupation. Terms may have been agreed with them and it may seem a certainty that a lease will be completed shortly. It can be tempting to allow the tenant to take occupation and start paying rent before the legal paperwork is completed, in anticipation of imminent completion.
For many years, claims involving litigants in person (“LiPs”) were often viewed as relatively straightforward from a litigation perspective. Increasingly, however, the emergence of readily accessible artificial intelligence tools is changing that landscape.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Hopcraft v Close Brothers Limited [2025] UKSC 33—which held that car dealers and finance companies could not be liable in tort for undisclosed commissions, though the lenders may be liable where the commission arrangements created an unfair relationship with their customers within the meaning of s.140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA 74”)—the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) published its Redress Scheme on 30 March 2026, designed to offer an alternative route to compensation for would-be claimants wishing to bring CCA 74 claims. The Scheme applies to regulated motor finance agreements created between 6 April 2007 and 1 November 2024.
In 2025, we reported on the case of Angel v Black Horse Ltd [2025] EWHC 490 (KC), a decision made on appeal from the County Court to the High Court in relation to so-called ‘omnibus’ claims. This has now been the subject of a further appeal to the Court of Appeal.
For many employers, the Employment Rights Act 2025 can feel like a moving target. Just as businesses have got to grips with the changes introduced earlier this year, another wave of reforms is now on the horizon.
For many business owners and finance professionals, intellectual property (IP) is often viewed as something relevant only to large corporates, tech companies, or highly innovative sectors. In reality, IP sits at the heart of most businesses, whether recognised or not. It can be one of your most valuable assets, capable of protecting market position, supporting valuation, and creating new revenue opportunities.
The recent High Court decision requiring Prince Harry and six other claimants to make an interim payment of approximately £9.5 million towards the defendant’s legal costs has brought into sharp focus an important aspect of litigation: costs.