Legal and Regulatory intelligence for you

GB Introduces Middlesbrough Air Navigation Emergency Regulations 2026

In 2026, the UK government introduced The Air Navigation (Restriction of Flying) (Middlesborough) (Emergency) (No.2) Regulations, imposing new emergency flying restrictions over Middlesbrough. This statutory instrument, published on legislation.gov.uk, signifies a critical and immediate intervention by the Secretary of State for Transport to control airspace within a specific geographical area, indicating an urgent situation requiring such measures. The precise nature or duration of the emergency, as well as the specific details of the restrictions imposed, are not detailed in the provided excerpt.

28 Aug

SI 2026/942: Ahavas Torah Boys Academy Postcode Designation Amended

The Designation of Schools Having a Religious Character (Independent Schools) (England) (Amendment and Revocations) Order 2026 was made in England to update the postcode entry for Ahavas Torah Boys Academy within the existing Designation of Schools Having a Religious Character (Independent Schools) (England) Order 2014. This statutory instrument, published on legislation.gov.uk, specifically amends the earlier 2014 Order (S.I. 2014/1024) to reflect a change in the school's address details. While seemingly a minor administrative update, this formal legislative action underscores the meticulous regulatory framework governing independent schools with a religious character in the jurisdiction, ensuring that official records accurately reflect the particulars of designated institutions.

28 Aug

Scotland: Ordinary Cause Rules 1993 Interlocutors Amendment Refines Note Format

An Act of Sederunt titled "Act of Sederunt (Ordinary Cause Rules 1993 Amendment) (Judgments) 2026" has been introduced. This Act amends Chapter 12 (interlocutors) of the Ordinary Cause Rules 1993.

28 Aug

Legal Cheek Podcast: SQE Without Training Contract Strategy Explored

Legal Cheek, on August 28, 2026, published an article and podcast discussing the strategic decision for aspiring solicitors in the UK regarding whether to undertake the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) before securing a training contract. This discussion is highly significant for aspiring solicitors, universities, and law firms in England and Wales, as it addresses critical financial, logistical, and career progression considerations under the relatively new SQE regime. It highlights the evolving landscape of solicitor qualification, moving away from the traditional Legal Practice Course (LPC) and training contract model, and the strategic choices individuals must make regarding self-funding, timing, and securing qualifying work experience (QWE). For firms, it touches upon recruitment strategies and the potential pool of candidates who may have already commenced or completed parts of the SQE, influencing how they structure their graduate recruitment and support for future solicitors. The article underscores the personal and professional dilemmas faced by candidates navigating this new pathway. The Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) is the new centralised assessment for all aspiring solicitors in England and Wales, introduced by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) in September 2021. It replaced the LPC and the traditional training contract as the sole route to qualification. The SQE consists of two parts: SQE1 (functioning legal knowledge) and SQE2 (practical legal skills). Alongside passing both SQE assessments, candidates must complete two years of Qualifying Work Experience (QWE) and meet the SRA's suitability requirements. The article specifically touches on the interplay between SQE studies, QWE, and the traditional "training contract" which, while no longer a mandatory SRA requirement, remains a primary route for many to gain QWE and secure employment. The SRA's flexibility regarding QWE allows for various forms of legal work experience, not just the traditional training contract, which is a key point of discussion in the article, exploring alternative routes to qualification. The primary parties involved in this discussion are aspiring solicitors in England and Wales, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) as the regulatory body overseeing the SQE, Legal Cheek as the platform facilitating the discussion, and law firms involved in recruitment and talent development. Specific individuals mentioned are Nadia Ismail, a Legal Cheek writer who self-funded her SQE without a training contract initially, and Hannah Thompson, an events coordinator who will begin the SQE having already secured a training contract offer. Their contrasting experiences provide valuable insights into the different pathways and challenges associated with the SQE. Attorneys and legal professionals, particularly those involved in recruitment, talent management, or legal education within England and Wales, should closely monitor the trends and challenges discussed in this article. Understanding the motivations and experiences of candidates pursuing the SQE before or without a secured training contract is crucial for adapting recruitment strategies and supporting junior talent. For aspiring solicitors, the takeaway is to carefully weigh the financial implications, time commitment, and career benefits of different SQE pathways, considering both traditional training contracts and alternative QWE routes. Firms should consider how their recruitment processes accommodate candidates at different stages of SQE completion and how they can best support diverse pathways to qualification, potentially broadening their talent pool and fostering a more inclusive profession.

28 Aug

Wales Enacts GPDO 1995 Amendment 2026: Modifies Planning Law

An official Order has been issued to amend existing planning legislation. The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, which applies to Wales, is one of the instruments being modified.

27 Aug

UK: Crime and Policing Act 2026 Commencement No. 2 Regulations Published

The Crime and Policing Act 2026 (Commencement No. 1 and Saving Provision) Regulations 2026 have been formally enacted. These regulations bring specific provisions of the Crime and Policing Act 2026 (c. 20) into legal force.

27 Aug

Md Towhidul Islam Suspended: Improperly Accessed Home Office Visa Files

Md Towhidul Islam, a trainee solicitor in the UK, was suspended from practice for 12 months by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) for taking a second job at the Home Office and improperly accessing confidential visa files related to clients, family members, and acquaintances. This specific legal development involved Islam, while employed as a trainee at immigration firm Waterstone Legal, commencing work as an executive officer litigation caseworker at the Home Office in August 2019. In this Home Office role, he gained access to the Central Referencing System, which contains sensitive UK visa application data. The SDT heard that Islam accessed eight files not allocated to him: two pertaining to Waterstone Legal clients, five to family members, and one to a personal acquaintance. Crucially, Islam failed to disclose his continued employment as a trainee solicitor to the Home Office, despite being warned about restricted system access and careful handling of personal data. While the SRA accepted that most matters had concluded and his actions had no direct impact on live appeals, and there was no evidence of him passing information to third parties or intending harm, the tribunal found his conduct stemmed from a "misplaced and inappropriate curiosity" and that the risk of harm from such unauthorised access should have been obvious.

27 Aug

Mark Stephens LinkedIn Attribution: Lawyer Deletes Meghan Markle Post

Veteran UK media law solicitor Mark Stephens CBE encountered difficulties last week, prior to August 26, 2026, when a LinkedIn post he made, featuring content from X (formerly Twitter) with what was described as a "relaxed attitude to attribution," was deleted after being highlighted by legal news site RollOnFriday. This specific post, reacting to news of Harry and Meghan’s return to the UK, stated: “BREAKING‼️Cambridge University announce replacement for Jason Arday”, accompanied by a photo of Meghan Markle, and bore a striking resemblance to a post by "Suffragent" on X. The incident underscores the growing complexities and potential pitfalls of content sharing on social media, even for highly experienced legal professionals. This event carries significant legal and professional implications for practitioners in the UK and beyond, particularly concerning intellectual property rights, defamation, and professional conduct. In the UK, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 protects original works, including text and images, and unauthorised use or insufficient attribution can constitute copyright infringement. While the excerpt does not detail any specific legal action, the "trouble" could stem from potential claims of copyright violation or, depending on interpretation, even reputational damage to the individuals or institutions mentioned. Furthermore, solicitors are governed by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Principles and Code of Conduct, which mandate acting with integrity, maintaining public trust, and upholding the rule of law. A solicitor's public conduct, including on social media, is subject to scrutiny, and actions perceived as unprofessional or legally dubious can lead to disciplinary proceedings or reputational harm. The key parties involved in this reported incident include Mark Stephens CBE, a prominent solicitor, Legal Cheek as the reporting source, and RollOnFriday for spotting the post. Cambridge University and Meghan Markle were mentioned or depicted in the controversial post, while "Suffragent" was identified as the source of an almost identical post on X. For practising attorneys and legal professionals, this serves as a stark reminder that the digital realm demands the same, if not greater, diligence as traditional media. Firms should establish and rigorously enforce clear social media policies that address content sourcing, attribution, potential for misinterpretation, and adherence to professional standards. Attorneys must be acutely aware of copyright law, defamation risks, and their professional obligations when engaging with or sharing content online, understanding that a "relaxed attitude to attribution" can quickly escalate into significant professional embarrassment or legal challenge. The outcome of any potential professional or legal repercussions for Mr. Stephens is not reported in this excerpt.

26 Aug