![Digital concept of data flow](https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/-/media/images/nrf/hero/digital-concept-flow-lights.jpg?w=265&revision=2bcb14f7-5897-4d72-b329-f54ecf1859a8&revision=5250201361707387904&hash=1DBB7BD88F7D40EFEAB403B51B115D8F)
Publication
Generative AI: A global guide to key IP considerations
Artificial intelligence (AI) raises many intellectual property (IP) issues.
United Kingdom | Publication | 十二月 2021
On November 30, 2021, the Government published a series of tax-related consultations and policy papers, including a number of interesting consultations relating to real estate.
Noteworthy are the consultations on SDLT reliefs currently available for purchases of mixed property and multiple dwellings and the call for evidence on simplifying the option to tax.
The Government is considering a range of reforms to the way in which SDLT applies to mixed property transactions (that is, those which involve both residential and non-residential property) and the introduction of restrictions on the availability of multiple dwellings relief.
Mixed property transactions are subject to SDLT at the non-residential rates, which are typically significantly lower than the residential rates. There is a concern that transactions which have a minimal non-residential element can and do benefit from the rules in an unintended way. The consultation looks at two proposals for reform:
In both cases, the “six or more dwellings” rule, which treats such acquisitions as non-residential would remain as currently drafted.
Following the “call for evidence” on the VAT exemption for land which was published in May 2021, HMRC has published a summary of the responses. A range of responses was received and HMRC has decided to consult further on:
This latter proposal would be a radical change from the current system, and there is recognition that there could be challenges and unintended consequences in pursuing this approach. However, HMRC is keen to explore this option, particularly as it would be likely to reduce the administrative burden in dealing with notifications of options to tax.
For further information please contact Tax Partner Julia Lloyd.
The Electronic Communications Code (the Code) governs the relationship between network operators and site owners/occupiers in respect of access rights to install and keep electronic communications apparatus on land.
The Code, which was substantially reformed in December 2017, seeks to encourage such access through commercial negotiation and voluntary agreements, with the imposition of agreements by a tribunal as a back-stop. However, the proliferation of cases on the operation of the Code indicates that, overall, the regime introduced by the Code has not been a resounding success.
In our October 2021 Real Estate Focus we reported that the Government was analysing responses to a consultation on the Code with a view to making it more effective and user-friendly. The consultation identified three “problem” areas as being in particular need of further reform:
The outcome of the consultation, including the Government’s proposed changes to address these issues, was published on November 24, 2021. A significant number of responses also flagged another significant problem area arising as a result of changes made by the Digital Economy Act 2017 to the statutory valuation regime, which affects how much operators are required to pay site providers for the use of their land. However, the Government has reiterated that it does not intend to revisit that statutory valuation framework.
The Government’s proposed changes are set out in Part 2 of the Product Security and Telecommunications Infrastructure Bill. They are wide-ranging and include:
As to timing, the Bill was introduced to Parliament on November 24, 2021 and the date of the Second Reading is yet to be announced. Given the breadth of the Bill as a whole – Part 1 creates a new regulatory scheme to ensure that consumer connectable products are more secure against cyber-attacks – parliamentary scrutiny is likely to be considerable.
A draft Registration of Overseas Entities Bill was published in July 2018 but has made little progress of late despite the Government’s original plans to get it on the statute book in 2021.
To recap, the purpose of the draft Bill is to “prevent and combat the use of land in the UK for money laundering purposes by increasing the transparency of beneficial ownership information relating to overseas entities that own land in the UK”. It aims to achieve this through a new publicly available register of the beneficial owners and controllers of such entities to be held by Companies House.
In broad terms the draft Bill as introduced proposed that:
These proposals may well change of course - and possibly become more onerous - as the Bill progresses through Parliament, assuming it goes ahead.
So will it? A Government announcement made on November 2, 2021 confirmed that the register is still very much on the agenda: “The overseas entities register is one of a number of proposed corporate transparency reforms which together will play an important role in underpinning a strong, transparent and attractive business environment in the UK while reducing the opportunities for bad actors to abuse our systems and controls.”
Timing is a little more vague, with the Government promising to introduce legislation to Parliament “as soon as parliamentary time allows”.
If visitors to the Tate Modern public viewing platform can see straight into the interior of neighbouring flats with floor to ceiling windows - and take full advantage of the fact - does this amount to an actionable private nuisance?
This is the question that the Supreme Court has been asked to decide in Fearn and others v Board of the Trustees of the Tate Gallery.
Four long leasehold owners in a new development adjacent to the Tate Modern whose flats are directly opposite the Tate Modern’s viewing gallery sought an injunction requiring the Tate to prevent members of the public from observing their flats, alleging that this unreasonably interfered with their enjoyment of their flats and amounted to a nuisance.
The Court of Appeal had disagreed, holding that a private nuisance is a violation of real property rights and had no hesitation in concluding that mere overlooking is not capable of giving rise to a cause of action in private nuisance. It also rejected the argument that public viewing from the Tate Modern viewing gallery into the leaseholders’ flats infringed their rights to respect for their private lives and their homes under article 8(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The leaseholders’ appeal against those decisions was heard by the Supreme Court earlier this month. Will their Lordships decide that private nuisance is capable of providing a remedy against ‘viewing’ from neighbouring land? We await their judgment with great interest given its significance in a wider context.
Publication
Artificial intelligence (AI) raises many intellectual property (IP) issues.
Publication
We are delighted to announce that Al Hounsell, Director of Strategic Innovation & Legal Design based in our Toronto office, has been named 'Innovative Leader of the Year' at the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) Awards.
Publication
After a lacklustre finish to 2022 when compared to the vintage year for M&A that was 2021, dealmakers expected 2023 to see the market continue to cool in most sectors, in response to the economic headwinds of rising inflation (with its corresponding impact on financing costs), declining market valuations, tightening regulatory scrutiny and increasing geopolitical tensions.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023