header-logo header-logo

27 June 2025
Issue: 8122 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 27 June 2025

Costs

The New Lottery Company Ltd and another company v The Gambling Commission [2025] EWHC 1522 (TCC)

The Technology and Construction Court rejected the applications for security for costs by the defendant Gambling Commission and interested parties to the proceedings. The litigation arose from the Gambling Commission's procurement process for the award of the fourth National Lottery licence which took place between 2019 and 2022. The claimants did not succeed in obtaining the licence and made two claims challenging the fairness of the procurement process and the decision to award the fourth licence to the interested parties, claiming damages of approximately £1.3bn. The court considered two issues: (i) an entirely novel point as to whether the court had the power to award security for costs in favour of an interested party joined to the proceedings in that capacity; (ii) whether a parent company with limited assets may rely upon evidence of its control over a wholly owned subsidiary with substantial assets in order to avoid a determination that an order for security

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll