The consultation paper Fiduciary Duties of Investments Intermediaries: A Consultation Paper follows on from the Kay Report on UK Equity Markets and Long Term Decision Making (see below), and uses pensions as the example, tracing a chain of intermediaries from the prospective pensioner/saver to the registered shareholder of a UK company. There are well established duties on pension trustees to act in the best interests of scheme members, and it looks at how far these duties require trustees to maximize financial return over a short time scale, and how far trustees can consider other factors such as environmental and social impact. The consultation asks: Whether the law is right to allow trustees to consider ethical issues only in limited circumstances? Whether the legal obligations on trustees are conducive to investment strategies in the best interests of the ultimate beneficiaries? and if not, what specifically ne

This project, following a joint consultation in 2010, aims to modernise and clarify the safety regime governing level crossings in Great Britain. It aims to make it easier to close level crossings where necessary and preserve rights of way where appropriate. It recommends that safety should be regulated entirely by the Health and Safety at Work, etc Act 1974, and approved codes of practice and guidance under new powers given to the Office of Rail Regulation. Modern safety regulation should also take precedence over safety provisions in special Acts. It is also recommended that the Level Crossings Act 1983 be repealed. In place of level crossing orders under that Act, there should be regulations making provision for level crossing plans which may be entered into voluntarily in respect of public and private level crossings if the parties whish to create such an arrangement. Also recommended are creation of duties on railway operators and traffic authorities; clarification of boundaries between the enforcement responsibilities of the Office of Rail Regulation and those of the Health and Safety Executive; and disapplication of obsolete statutory provisions. Most of the recommendations for reform of the law are given effect in the draft Level Crossings Bill and draft Level Crossings Plans Regulations both of which are included in the report

The law must be updated to deal with new challenges posed, for example, by internet paedophiles and organised gangs planning criminal activities who may be operating on a world-wide basis. In "Conspiracy and Attempts (Consultation Paper 318)", The Law Commission recommends a series of changes to improve and clarify the law governing conspiracy and attempts to commit crimes to make it simpler and fairer both for the prosecution and the accused. This report contains a draft Conspiracy and Attempts Bill that would: make it possible to bring a charge of conspiracy when conspirators deliberately take a risk that they will engage in criminal activity; abolish the outdated rule that prevents married couples from being charged with conspiring to commit a crime; make it possible to bring a charge of conspiracy when conspirators deliberately take a risk that they will engage in criminal activity; and, introduce a new defence of reasonableness to a charge of conspiracy. The report follows on from the 2007 consultation paper, "Conspiracy and Attempts: A Consultation Paper (Consultation Paper 183)".

The Law Commission's main task is to review areas of the law and to make recommendations for change. The Commission seeks to ensure that the law is as simple, accessible, fair, modern and cost-effective as possible.

A conservation covenant is a voluntary agreement between a landowner and responsible body (charity, public body or local/central Government) to do or not do something on their land for a conservation purpose. This might be, for example, an agreement to maintain woodland and allow public access to it, or to refrain from using certain pesticides on native vegetation. These agreements are long lasting and continue after the landowner has parted with the land, ensuring that its conservation value is protected for the public benefit. Conservation covenants are used in many other jurisdictions, but do not exist in the law of England and Wales. Instead, landowners and responsible bodies are relying on complex and expensive legal workarounds, or the limited number of existing statutory covenants that enable certain covenants to be enforced by specified bodies (for example, the National Trust). This paper considers the following key issues: who should be able to create a conservation covenant?; what should a conservation covenants be for?; should there be public oversight of a new statutory scheme?; how should conservation covenants be created and recorded?; how should a conservation covenant be managed? ; what should happen if there is a breach of a conservation covenant?; when and how should a conservation covenant be modified or come to an end?; could any existing statutory covenants be replaced by a system of conservation covenants?; what will be the impact of introducing a system of conservation covenants? A number of provisional proposals are presented.

In this report the Law Commission makes recommendations to form the basis of a revised Electronic Communications Code. The Code was enacted in 1984 to regulate landline telephone provision. It sets out the regime that governs the rights of designated electronic communications operators to maintain infrastructure on public and private land. In modern times, it applies to the infrastructure forming networks which support broadband, mobile internet and telephone, cable television and landlines. This project focuses on private property rights between landowners and electronic communications providers; it does not consider planning. The current Code has been criticised by courts and the people who work with it as out of date, unclear and inconsistent with other legislation. The reforms would: provide a clearer definition of the market value that landowners can charge for the use of their land, giving them greater confidence in negotiating and giving providers a better idea of what their network is likely to cost; clarify the conditions under which a landowner can be ordered to give a designated network provider access to his or her land, bringing more certainty to both landowners and providers and helping them to reach agreements more easily; resolve the inconsistencies between the current Code and other legislation; clarify the rights of landowners to remove network equipment from land; specify limited rights for operators to upgrade and share their network equipment; and improve the procedure for resolving disputes under the Code. It will be for Government to draft and implement a revised Code.

The Law Commission's main task is to review areas of the law and to make recommendations for change. The Commission seeks to ensure that the law is as simple, accessible, fair, modern and cost-effective as possible.

This Consultation Paper reviews the law governing the conduct of elections and referendums in the UK, and sets out our provisional proposals and questions for consultation with the public. This is a joint project by the Law Commission of England and Wales, the Scottish Law Commission and the Northern Ireland Law Commission.

The Electronic Communications Code (schedule 2 to the Telecommunications Act 1984) sets out the regime that governs the rights of electronic communications operators to install and maintain infrastructure on public and private land. The Code strikes a balance between the rights and interests of landowners and network operators. This consultation paper discusses the current law and set out a number of provisional proposals and options for reform. The paper considers all the main provisions of the current Code and areas highlighted for potential reform include: the rights of operators and landowners under the Code, and the position of third parties; operators' obligations under the Code and related regulations; the test applied to determine whether code rights are granted to an operator where a landowner objects; the measure of the financial award to be paid to the landowner where an operator is granted code rights; the appropriate forum for the resolution of disputes, and other procedural issues; the interaction between the Code and other statutory regimes. The Code applies throughout the UK. The Commission's focus is on the law in England and Wales, but the project is being conducted in consultation with the Scottish and Northern Irish Law Commissions.

Dated December 2013

This consultation provisionally proposed that kidnapping and false imprisonment should be replaced by one or more offences set out in statute. It was provisionally proposed that the offences should be made triable in a magistrates' court as well as in the Crown Court. Consultees disagreed, and on further statistical analysis it appeared that no significant number of kidnapping and false imprisonment cases result in sentences of less than 6 months' imprisonment. It was therefore recommended that these offences remain triable in the Crown Court only, with the existing maximum penalty of life imprisonment. In line with the model favoured by consultees, the creation of two distinct statutory offences to replace the existing common law were recommended: that false imprisonment be replaced with a new statutory offence of unlawful detention (a label which we believe better captures the nature of the offence) and a new statutory kidnapping offence. It was also recommended to increase of the maximum sentences for these offences from 7 to 14 years' imprisonment, in order to avoid undesirable inconsistency between the most serious instances of these offences and kidnapping offences of a comparable level of seriousness and that the offence under section 1 be extended to cover cases of wrongful retention of a child abroad, in breach of the permission given by another parent (or other connected person) or the court. This extension would close the gap in the law highlighted in the case of R (Nicolaou) v Redbridge Magistrates' Court.

Public bodies report that they cannot always share the data they need to share and, as a result, miss out on opportunities to provide better services to citizens. At the same time, the protection of privacy is fundamental to any data sharing regime. The law surrounding data sharing is complex. Powers to share data are scattered across a very large number of statutes and may be set out expressly or implied. In addition, there are common law powers. In this scoping project the Law Commission considered the following questions: are there hurdles to effective data sharing between public bodies (including private bodies engaged in public service delivery)?; Are those hurdles inappropriate?; How far do problems in data sharing stem from the law?; How far do problems in data sharing stem from other causes, such as a lack of training or guidance, organisational incentives and disincentives?; Would law reform solve or mitigate the problems? The Commission recommends that a full law reform project should be carried out in order to create a principled and clear legal structure for data sharing, which will meet the needs of society. The scope of the review should extend beyond data sharing between public bodies to the disclosure of information between public bodies and other organisations carrying out public functions.

This Law Commission report looks at the accurate contemporary reporting of the content of legal proceedings taking place in public in criminal courts. More specifically, this report focuses on the power of the Crown Court to order that such reporting be postponed to avoid prejudice to court proceedings. The Contempt of Court Act 1981 provides that publication of material which has the effect of risking serious prejudice to active court proceedings can in some circumstances be punished as a contempt of court. The Commission is concerned with all court reporting, whether broadcast (on television, radio or over the internet) or published (electronically or in print format) and whether by accredited press representatives or others such as bloggers. The recommendations would: ensure that court reporting postponement orders are all posted on a single publicly accessible website (a similar website currently operates in Scotland); include a further restricted service where, for a charge, registered users could find out the detail of the reporting restriction and could sign up for automated email alerts of new orders; greatly reduce their risk of contempt for publishers, from large media organisations to individual bloggers, and enable them to comply with the court's restrictions or report proceedings to the public with confidence.

A TSO version of a title previously published by HM Government.

The Law Commission's main task is to review areas of the law and to make recommendations for change. The Commission seeks to ensure that the law is as simple, accessible, fair, modern and cost-effective as possible. In this report, Part 1 describes the Commission, its programme of work and consultation methods. Part 2 reviews 2007-08, and looks at the targets for publication of reports and consultation papers the Law Commission has set for the period. Part 3 looks at the progress that has been made in getting the Government to accept and implement the recommendations made in its reports.This is an area of concern to the Commission, and an appendix lists all reports from 1966 to March 2007, with details on whether the each report was accepted fully or in part, rejected, accepted but not implemented, or pending. Parts 4-8 cover the work of each law team in the Law Commission over the course of the year: commercial and common law; criminal law, evidence and procedure; property and trust law; public law; statute law. Part 9 looks at relations with external agencies, and Part 10 relates to the Commission's staffing and resources.

This joint report by the Law Commission and Scottish Law Commission considers the redress available to consumers who have been the victims of misleading or aggressive practices by traders. Currently consumers have to rely on private law rights if they want to take action. The Commissions' review found current private law in this area to be fragmented, complex and unclear, and recommends new legislation to provide redress to consumers who experience misleading and aggressive practices in their dealings with traders. The aim is to clarify and simplify the current law on misleading practices, and to improve the law on aggressive practices by filling the gaps in the current law. Limited reform, targeting the most serious causes of consumer detriment, is proposed. The report follows the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 in most, but not all, respects. Recommendations are made on liability and remedies. Consumers would have the right to unwind the transaction (get a refund), or receive a discount on the price. Additional damages may be recoverable to compensate for additional loss. The report also considers the specific area of unfair payment collection.

This joint discussion paper covers the following issues: the business insured's duty of disclosure, and the law of warranties. Under current law, a business policyholder has a duty to disclose every material circumstance it knows about the risk it wants to insure. Failure to do so entitles the insurer to avoid the contract, which means the insurer may treat it as if it did not exist and refuse all claims. The duty is unclear and sometimes poorly understood, while the consequence of breach is too harsh. The proposals aim to clarify how policyholders are expected to comply with the duty when presenting a risk to insurers and to encourage insurers to assist them in that task. Fairer remedies for breach where the policyholder has not been dishonest., are proposed. An insurance warranty is an important term which, unless exactly complied with by the policyholder, results in the automatic discharge of the insurer's liability for loss. It makes no difference if the breach is trivial, not material to the risk or if the policyholder remedies the breach prior to loss being incurred. The Commissions propose that breach of a warranty should suspend the insurer's liability for the duration of the breach; remedy of the breach restores liability. Where a term is designed to reduce a particular type of risk, liability should only be suspended in relation to that risk. This would be mandatory for consumer insurance but subject to freedom to contract for business insurance.

This consultation paper deals with the question: when and how should the individual be able to obtain redress from a public body that has acted in a substandard manner? The Commission believes that, in principle, claimants should be entitled to obtain redress for loss caused by clearly substandard administrative action. But it also realises that special consideration should be given to the role played by public bodies when considering when and under what terms they should be liable for such losses. Part 3 of the paper analyses the mechanisms currently available for aggrieved citizens: formal complaints procedures; external non-court avenues, such as tribunals and public inquiries; public sector ombudsmen; and, court action. The vast majority of cases are handled effectively in the first three mechanisms. The appropriateness and effectiveness of court action is investigated, looking at judicial review and private law.In private law the analysis focuses on the torts of misfeasance in public office, breach of statutory duty and negligence. Part 4 highlights certain defects in the law relating to court-based remedies. In both public and private law, the Commission finds a strong argument for the reform of court-based administrative redress, and suggests specific reforms. To encourage the role of the ombudsmen, in part 5 the paper suggests the creation of a power to stay actions, encouraging claimants to submit suitable claims to the ombudsmen before taking court action. Secondly, it suggests that access to the ombudsmen be improved by modifying the 'statutory bar' and removing the MP filter in relation to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. Part 6 examines potential costs and benefits for public bodies, possible statutory immunities and caps for individual claims. There is a need for more data on the resource implications of the suggested reforms.