The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has said following its recent multi-firm review of how its climate disclosure rules have been operating that it will look to “streamline and enhance” its sustainability reporting framework and has pledged to “simplify disclosure requirements”. This is welcome news for the industry and seems to be driven by feedback from the asset management sector that Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) reporting rules are overly granular. There also seems to be a move towards consolidation across UK sustainability reporting frameworks as the FCA will consider the Sustainability Disclosure Requirements (SDR), International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) and transition planning going forward.
In March 2025, the Home Office issued a revised version of its statutory guidance âTransparency in Supply Chainsâ following the House of Lords Modern Slavery Act 2015 Committeeâs report. This marks the first full revision of the guidance in nearly a decade. In an article for Compliance & Risk, Jon Tuck and David Yadid examine the current legal framework under the Act, unpack the key changes introduced by the new guidance, and consider their implications for businesses.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has published a policy statement (PS25/9: New rules for the public offers and admissions to trading regime) under which it sets out the rules for the new regime that will apply in respect of prospectuses. This follows the consultation process the FCA undertook via the previous publication of consultation papers CP 25/2 and CP 24/12. The Public Offers and Admissions to Trading Regulations 2024 (POATRs) will replace the UK Prospectus Regulation (UKPR). The POATRs are generally in line with the proposals consulted on, with some modifications to reflect feedback from market participants. The new rules will come into effect on 19 January 2026.
Our global panel discussed how authorities are stepping up antitrust enforcement, the challenges of managing cross-border investigations, and what effective compliance looks like in 2025. Authorities are increasingly proactive and coordinated, using AI and data scraping to detect infringements such as bid rigging, price signalling, parallel pricing, and suspicious labour…
At the Annual Compliance conference recently held in London, the session on âSupply chains – Navigating ESG and Trade-related Risksâ examined the intensifying ESG and trade-related risks facing global supply chains, shaped by shifting political priorities and evolving regulatory frameworks.
At the Annual Compliance conference recently held in London, the session on âUS and UK Enforcement in the Current Climate: Strategic Shifts and Global Implicationsâ explored the evolving enforcement landscape across the UK, US, and Latin America, with a particular focus on strategic priorities, inter-agency cooperation, and the practical implications of recent policy shifts.
This session examined recent geopolitical and regulatory developments in anti-bribery and corruption (ABC) enforcement across the US and UK.
The Presidents of the Employment Tribunals (England & Wales and Scotland) have issued an addendum to the Joint Presidential Guidance on employment tribunal awards, updating the Vento bands for damages for injury to feelings and psychiatric injury in discrimination claims.
The government has published a consultation seeking views on how to introduce mandatory ethnicity and disability pay reporting for employers with 250 or more employees. The consultation closes on 10 June 2025.
The Court of Appeal has held that dismissing an employee for a social media post expressing gender critical beliefs and beliefs on same sex marriage was disproportionate, and therefore discriminatory. This decision confirms the legal tests for balancing conflicting protected beliefs, underscoring the basic principle that employees have the right to manifest their religious or philosophical beliefs, subject only to limited, objectively justifiable exceptions. While the post was arguably offensive to some gay and/or trans people, expressing a protected belief that is offensive to others does not by itself justify disciplinary action; there must be something objectively objectionable in the manner of expression. This is a high threshold; merely âintemperateâ language is not sufficient.