Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer Podcasts

In this "Back to school" edition of the public law podcast, Jasveer Randhawa is joined by HSF Kramer partners Nusrat Zar and James Wood. Together, they discuss recent developments in the duty to consult in the cases of Liberty and Possible (The 10:10 Foundation) before delving into human rights challenges in Shvidler and Wikimedia Foundation. To conclude, they explore judicial approaches in complex areas and reflect on the balance between discretion and accountability in high policy contexts. Speakers: Jasveer Randhawa (Knowledge Counsel), Nusrat Zar (Partner), and James Wood (Partner). You can find out more about the cases covered in this podcast on our blog at the following links: Another twist in the consultation case law – so just what is a consultation? https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/publiclaw/2025-posts/another-twist-in-the-consultation-case-law Challenges to the Jet Zero Strategy grounded as Administrative Court dismisses claims based on consultation and policy concerns https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/publiclaw/2025-posts/challenges-to-the-jet-zero-strategy-grounded Supreme Court decides on the correct standard of review for proportionality https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/publiclaw/2025-posts/supreme-court-decides-on-the-correct-standard-of-review-for-proportionality High Court dismisses Wikimedia’s challenge to Online Safety Act thresholds—but leaves the door open for future challenges https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/publiclaw/2025-posts/high-court-dismisses-wikimedias-challenge-to-online-safety-act-thresholds-but-leaves-door-open-for-future-challenges High Court gives guidance on regulator's interpretation of legislation and codes https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/publiclaw/2025-posts/high-court-gives-guidance-on-regulators-interpretation-of-legislation-and-codes Procedural flaw under the National Security and Investment Act regime insufficient to invalidate decision https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/publiclaw/2025-posts/procedural-flaw-under-the-national-security-and-investment-act-regime-insufficient-to-invalidate-decision

Marina Reason and Chris Hurn discuss the FCA's proposals for regulating cryptoasset custody, set out in chapter 4 of consultation paper 25/14. This is our second podcast considering CP25/14: we unpacked the FCA's proposals on issuing qualifying stablecoins in our podcast "Decrypting the FCA stablecoin rules" - https://soundcloud.com/hsfkramer/fsr-podcast-decrypting-the-fca-stablecoin-rules. We also examined CP25/15, the FCA's proposed new prudential regime for cryptoasset firms, in our podcast "Decoding the FCA crypto capital rules" - https://soundcloud.com/hsfkramer/fsr-podcast-decoding-the-fca-crypto-capital-rules. These FCA consultations followed publication by HM Treasury of near-final draft legislation to create new regulated activities for cryptoassets, and an FCA discussion paper (DP25/1) on regulating cryptoassets, We discussed these developments in our podcast on "The Top 3 takeaways from the new crypto rules" - https://soundcloud.com/hsfkramer/fsr-the-new-uk-crypto-rules - and our related blog post - https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/fsrandcorpcrime/2025-posts/uk-cryptoassets-regime-the-draft-rules-have-landed.

Today we’re diving into a question that’s becoming increasingly relevant for corporates globally: What happens if …you’re faced with a sanctions issue and need to investigate? Join Partner Leon Chung, Senior Associate Cynthianna Yau and Solicitor Kayla Laird as they explore this frontline issue for legal and compliance teams to understand the sanctions framework as they manage international transactions, supply chains, or service agreements.

This podcast explores the impact of minimum energy efficiency standard (MEES) on commercial leases in the logistics sector, including rent review, lease renewals and dilapidation claims. Speakers: Julia Petrenko, Barrister, Falcon Chambers, Seb Taylor, Partner, HSF Kramer and Matthew Weal, Senior Associate, HSF Kramer

In this edition of our banking litigation podcast, we consider some recent cases that will be most relevant to in-house lawyers at banks and financial institutions. This episode is hosted by John Corrie, a partner in our banking litigation team, who is joined by Ceri Morgan and special guest Nic Patmore. You can find links to our blog posts on the case covered in this podcast below: • Supreme Court decision in Hopcraft motor finance commission appeal – key implications for financial services firms https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2025-08/supreme-court-decision-in-hopcraft-motor-finance-commission-appeal • Banking Litigation Podcast Episode 54: Hopcraft Special Edition https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2025-08/banking-litigation-podcast-episode-54-hopcraft-special-edition • English High Court decides in favour of banks in EuroChem bond claim, confirming payment under on-demand bonds prohibited due to Russian sanctions https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2025-08/english-high-court-decides-in-favour-of-banks-in-eurochem-bond-claim • High Court grants bank stakeholder relief under CPR Part 86 in USD 11 million deposit dispute involving competing claims https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2025-08/high-court-grants-bank-stakeholder-relief-under-cpr-part-86 • High Court permits documents obtained via Norwich Pharmacal Order to be used against disclosing bank in related APP fraud claim https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2025-08/high-court-permits-documents-obtained-via-norwich-pharmacal-order • Financial List finds claim for declaratory relief brought by ultimate beneficial owners of loan notes against issuer is arguable https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2025-04/financial-list-finds-claim-for-declaratory-relief • Privy Council abrogates so-called "Shareholder Rule" under English law: companies can assert privilege against their shareholders https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2025-04/privy-council-abrogates-so-called-shareholder-rule-under-english-law-companies-can-assert-privilege-against-their-shareholders • Hague 2019 Judgments Convention comes into force in UK https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2025-07/hague-2019-judgments-convention-comes-into-force-in-uk • Civil Justice Council's final report on litigation funding recommends "light touch" statutory regulation https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2025-04/civil-justice-councils-final-report-on-litigation-funding-recommends-light-touch-statutory-regulation Don't forget to subscribe to the banking litigation blog https://hsfnotes.com/bankinglitigation/subscribe/

In this last episode of the series, the Corporate Crime and Investigations team considers the application of the Failure to Prevent Fraud offence to complex group structures including in relation to parent companies and their subsidiaries (whether incorporated in the UK or overseas). Susannah Cogman, Eamon McCarthy-Keen, and Clara Browne examine several important issues in this episode such as: (i) how the offence applies to corporate group structures; (ii) the potential liability of a parent company for the activities of its subsidiaries and their employees, including where the employee is a 'senior manager'; (iii) the application of the offence to global companies; and (iv) conduct across borders. They also provide insight into the steps that businesses should take to prepare for the imminent implementation of the Failure to Prevent Fraud offence at a group and individual subsidiary level. You can find links to further background reading relevant to the episode below: (1) Summary table regarding parent-subsidiary liability https://marketing.hsfkramer.com/20/33497/landing-pages/des0004516-v5.pdf (2) HSF Kramer FTPF Briefing https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/fsrandcorpcrime/2025-posts/ftpfraud-ready-sep25 (3) The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/56/section/204#:~:text=204Guidance%20about%20preventing%20fraud%20offences&text=(1)The%20Secretary%20of%20State,in%20section%20199(1). (4) Home Office Guidance https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67f8ef1845705eb1a1513f35/Failure+to+Prevent+Fraud+Guidance+-+English+Language+v1.6.pdf (5) UK Finance Guidance https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/system/files/2025-02/UK Finance Failure to Prevent Fraud industry guidance.pdf

This episode brings together our CCI and contentious regulatory teams to consider the impact of the Failure to Prevent Fraud offence on financial institutions. Jon Ford, Elizabeth Head and Ally Fitzgerald explore the risk areas that financial institutions may be exposed to as well as why financial institutions may be at an increased risk of enforcement in comparison to other organisations. They also provide insight into the steps that the HSF Kramer team have seen financial institutions take to prepare themselves for the September implementation date. Please also see our blogpost https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/fsrandcorpcrime/2025-posts/ftpf-financialinstitutions for further discussion of this topic, and this briefing https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/fsrandcorpcrime/2025-posts/ftpfraud-ready-sep25 for an overview of the new offence of Failure to Prevent Fraud.

In this episode, we talk about Practice Statement 35, which the UK Takeover Panel published recently, on profit forecasts, synergy statements (referred to in the Takeover Code as quantified financial benefits statements or QFBSs) and connected investment research. Areas we discuss include: • the regime in the Takeover Code for profit forecasts; • how the rules apply where a target has unequivocally rejected an approach; • the Panel Executive's approach to reports on synergy statements where a deal leaks; • its approach where a target provides a profit forecast to a bidder as part of the due diligence exercise; • when a forward-looking statement will be an aspirational target; • how the regime applies to profit forecasts for financial periods which end more than 15 months in the future; and • when the Executive may grant a dispensation from the rules that apply when a connected firm publishes investment research.

Episode 29: Gender-based undervaluation and its impact on modern award rates of pay Join industrial relations partners Nick Ogilvie and Rohan Doyle on our latest episode of Inside IR where they unpack the latest developments in the Fair Work Commission’s assessment of gender undervaluation of wages, and explore the impact this is having on minimum award rates of pay. Over the last few years, the Commission has embarked on a comprehensive process to ensure that minimum rates of pay in modern awards reflect employees’ work value and ensure equal remuneration for equivalent work performed by men and women. These cases are already delivering substantial increases in modern award rates of pay and arise in the context of the Commission’s new obligation to consider gender-based undervaluation when varying award rates following the introduction of the Secure Jobs, Better Pay reforms. On this episode, Nick and Rohan explore the current cases before the Fair Work Commission and some of the key early decisions, and discuss which industries and occupations are likely to be considered next. Update: Since filming, the Fair Work Commission has also issued a Statement https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/sites/am2025-19/2025fwcfb156.pdf confirming that the Commission will now determine whether minimum award rates of pay should be increased for professional degree-qualified employees covered by a provisional list of 22 modern awards. The list of awards is contained at Attachment A of the Statement. Interested parties have the opportunity to comment on the provisional list by 22 August 2025. Please get in touch with a member of our team if you would like to understand this process in further detail or are considering making a submission.

In this SPECIAL EDITION of our banking litigation podcast, we consider the Supreme Court's much-anticipated judgment in Hopcraft & Anor v Close Brothers Limited [2025] UKSC 33 https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/uksc/2025/33 (relating to lender liability for the payment of third-party broker commissions in the motor finance context) and its key implications for financial services firms. This episode is hosted by John Corrie, a partner in our banking litigation team, who is joined by Ceri Morgan and special guests Emma Deas and Hywel Jenkins. You can find links to our blog posts on the case covered in this podcast below: • Supreme Court decision in Hopcraft motor finance commission appeal – key implications for financial services firms https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2025-08/supreme-court-decision-in-hopcraft-motor-finance-commission-appeal • Court of Appeal finds lenders liable in motor finance broker commission cases https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/bankinglitigation/2024-posts/Court-of-Appeal-finds-lender-liable-in-motor-finance-broker-commission-cases- Don't forget to subscribe to the banking litigation blog https://hsfnotes.com/bankinglitigation/subscribe/

Inside Employment: EP4, Investigations, Part 2 - Practical insights from a workplace investigator In part 2 of our investigations series, Tony Wood and Lucy Boyd sit down with Lisa Bradley, Principal of Papillon Consulting Group, to explore the realities of workplace investigations. Lisa shares her insights on emerging trends, including the rise of anonymous complaints, and breaks down the nuances between cultural reviews and investigations into specific allegations. Lisa offers a candid look at the challenges investigators face, including how they assess credibility, manage confidentiality, manage timelines and efficiency, and avoid common pitfalls. Whether you're navigating an investigation or simply curious about what goes on behind closed doors, this episode is packed with practical advice on the investigative process.

In this special episode of the Inside Arbitration podcast, Vanessa Naish, Liz Kantor and Andrew Cannon unpack the new Arbitration Act 2025, now in force across England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Whether you're drafting clauses, navigating arbitration proceedings, or preparing for arbitrations claims in the English court, this episode breaks down the Act’s most impactful changes - from retrospective application and summary disposal powers to arbitrator disclosures and jurisdictional challenges. Tune in for practical insights and strategic takeaways that every arbitration practitioner should know.

This is the 32nd episode of our series of commercial litigation update podcasts. In this episode we discuss recent judgments on privilege, litigation funding agreements, security for costs, the impact of sanctions on court orders and a couple of interesting contract law decisions, on good faith and contractual certainty, and an upcoming pilot on public access to court documents. This episode is hosted by Maura McIntosh, a knowledge counsel in our commercial litigation team, who is joined by James Baily, a disputes partner, and Jay Tampi, a senior associate in our disputes team. Below you can find links to our blog posts on the developments and cases covered in this podcast. • Privy Council abrogates so-called "Shareholder Rule" under English law: companies can assert privilege against their shareholders https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2025-07/privy-council-abrogates-so-called-shareholder-rule-under-english-law-companies-can-assert-privilege-against-their-shareholders • Court of Appeal confirms litigation funding agreements are not DBAs if based on a multiple of funding rather than a percentage of damages https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2025-07/court-of-appeal-confirms-litigation-funding-agreements-are-not-dbas-if-based-on-a-multiple-of-funding-rather-than-a-percentage-of-damages • High Court finds there is no discretion to order security for costs in favour of an interested party https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2025-06/high-court-finds-there-is-no-discretion-to-order-security-for-costs-in-favour-of-an-interested-party • High Court declines to vary interim payment order despite sanctions concerns https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2025-07/high-court-declines-to-vary-interim-payment-order-despite-sanctions-concerns • High Court finds breach of express obligations of good faith but no loss https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2025-07/high-court-finds-breach-of-express-obligations-of-good-faith-but-no-loss • Agreements to agree: Court of Appeal finds supply contract enforceable despite leaving price to be fixed https://www.hsfkramer.com/notes/litigation/2025-07/agreements-to-agree-court-of-appeal-finds-supply-contract-enforceable-despite-leaving-price-to-be-fixed See podcast episode transcript here: https://marketing.hsfkramer.com/20/33497/landing-pages/commercial-litigation-podcast-ep32-transcript.pdf

In this latest episode of Insurance Bites, Sarah McNally, Partner, and Sarah Irons, Knowledge Counsel, from the Insurance & Professional Risks team, explore the topical issue of tariffs and where corporates might find cover for some of the increased risks they face due to increased tariffs.

In this episode we talk about the influence we have seen shareholders have on recent transactions. Areas we discuss include shareholders: • pushing for M&A • influencing M&A, including through the use of irrevocable undertakings and stub equity • looking to block deals; and • being directly targeted for support by both targets and bidders. We also discuss the key takeaways for companies when dealing with shareholders. Speakers Antonia Kirkby and Greg Mulley.

In this episode we talk about the influence we have seen shareholders have on recent transactions. Areas we discuss include shareholders: • pushing for M&A • influencing M&A, including through the use of irrevocable undertakings and stub equity • looking to block deals; and • being directly targeted for support by both targets and bidders. We also discuss the key takeaways for companies when dealing with shareholders. Speakers Antonia Kirkby and Greg Mulley.

In part one of our investigations double episode, we unpack the technical and legal dimensions of workplace investigations, with a spotlight on whistleblowing. Together, Tony Wood and Lucy Boyd explore how clients can navigate the complexities of internal complaints, regulatory obligations and reputational risks. They spend time discussing the overall trend towards greater transparency, for example through positive duty obligations and shareholder activism, and how this is reshaping how organisations respond to complaints and how they conduct investigations. Listeners will gain insights into: • The importance of respecting whistleblower confidentiality and engaging with disclosures constructively. • How to structure investigations to ensure procedural fairness and legal compliance. • Common pitfalls in managing investigations and how to avoid them. • The evolving landscape of workplace activism, including the influence of movements like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter, and how the growing emphasis on psychosocial safety has empowered employees to speak up about misconduct. Whether you're an HR professional, in-house counsel, or business leader, this episode offers practical guidance and strategic insights to help you stay ahead in a rapidly changing compliance environment. Stay tuned for part 2 (available next week) where we speak with Lisa Bradley, a veteran workplace investigator, about her insights on how to conduct an effective investigation, including some of her key tips and traps and how to make factual findings when confronted by conflicting witness evidence.

On 2 July 2025, the FCA published Consultation Paper 25/18 https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/consultation/cp25-18.pdf, "Tackling non-financial misconduct in financial services", comprising both a Policy Statement and final rules, together with further consultation on the revised guidance proposed for the FCA Handbook. It has taken the FCA considerable time to reach this phase in the development of its NFM policy, and there has been significant change from its original proposals in CP23/20 https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/consultation/cp23-20.pdf. Even with further clarity and guidance from the FCA, this undoubtedly remains one of the most difficult areas for firms to grapple with. Join Jon Ford, Hywel Jenkins, Christine Young and Michael Tan as they discuss CP25/18 and consider whether it raises more questions than it answers.

Following new amendments to Australian anti-bribery and corruption laws introduced in September 2024, HSF Kramer Partners Leon Chung, Tania Gray and Eunice Park delve further into the offence and what Australian corporates should do if they find themselves in a foreign bribery situation and practical steps organisations can take to address risks. We are joined by HSF Kramer London Partner Kate Meakin to share practical insights from the United Kingdom’s experiences with similar laws.

In this episode of Inside Safety, presenters Nerida Jessup and Olga Klimczak examine the evolving legal and regulatory landscape surrounding silica exposure and the associated risk of silicosis. The episode offers timely insights into compliance, risk management, and health outcomes – particularly in high-risk sectors like manufacturing and mining. The discussion also draws on historical parallels, such as asbestos, to explore what the future may hold for silica regulation. With the establishment of a dedicated regulatory silica taskforce, the presenters highlight emerging guidance and enforcement trends that are shaping workplace safety. Whether you're advising on policy, managing operations, or working on the ground, this episode provides essential context for navigating silica-related risks in today’s industrial environments. Note: this episode was recorded before the recent amendments enabling NSW courts to extend the limitation period if it is in 'the interests of justice.'