All posts by law.dottir

Facebook comments as “reviews”

Reviews are powerful marketing tools. From making dinner reservations to buying a new pair of shoes, I very rarely part with my hard-earned cash before checking out the ratings and comments online.

I also follow quite a few restaurants, designers, photographers, and fitness bloggers on Facebook, and often see people leave reviews there, too. Recently, a client asked us if they could use comments left on their public Facebook page as “reviews” or “testimonials” for their service, and post these on their website. As a business, what can you do with those comments? And if you leave a review on a Facebook page, what are your rights over what you’ve written?

Read more…

The first year, and next steps

This week marks my one-year anniversary with the firm, and today I found myself thinking back on the technical knowledge I’ve acquired thus far.  I’m happy to say that I now feel confident enough to lead a straightforward real estate or corporate finance transaction on my own. I’ve had some incredible hands-on experience in my corporate seat especially, and was even mentioned in some of our press releases for two separate capital markets deals.

What I wasn’t expecting however was to still feel uncertain about the direction I want my career to take.

Read more…

Crossing the wall? How companies can reveal inside information without contravening Market Abuse Regulations

When I hear the term “insider trading,” I tend to think of stories that make the headlines: Enron, Martha Stewart, and SAC Group. But what if you’re working for a company listed on the stock market, and need to speak to someone – say, your company’s lawyer – about an upcoming merger, profit warning, or mass redundancy?

It is not unusual for a public company to disclose important market moving information – such as advance warnings of earnings results – to analysts, lawyers, or selected investors before making the same information available to the general public.

Market moving information is a term used in stock market investing, defined as information that would cause any reasonable investor to make a buy or sell decision.

In regulatory parlance, when a public company reveals market moving information to a select group of people before it discloses that information to all investors at the same time, this is known as selective disclosure, or “wall crossing”. The problem with selective disclosure is that it creates an uneven playing field for investors, giving some people the opportunity to profit from market moving information before others.

Read more…

Transparency in control

Companies trading on the London Stock Exchange’s Alternative Investment Market are no longer exempt from publishing details of significant shareholders.

It is widely accepted that London is the money laundering capital of the world, with the property market being the primary avenue for the laundering of £100 billion ($128b USD) of illicit money each year (The Guardian, 2016).

To combat money laundering, tax evasion, terrorism financing, and fraud, both national and international organisations have introduced tougher, more wide-reaching legislation over the last few years.  One such statute came into full effect this week here in the United Kingdom: Directive (EU) 2015/849, or the fourth anti-money laundering directive (“AML4”).

Breaking it down
Complementary to the AML4 legislation is the Persons with Significant Control (PSC) regime. The new law requires all companies – private and public – to keep a recorded register of the persons (including legal entities) who can control or otherwise influence a company. A PSC, popularly referred to as “beneficial owners,” is someone with more than a 25 per cent holding of the shares in a company.

The rationale is that making public this information will prevent fraud and tax evasion through the use of overseas holding structures, which often mask the true ownership of a company or the property it owns.

Read more…

photo via Handelsblatt Global

Banks and Brexit

On Monday evening, I attended a lecture on the potential impact of Brexit on the UK financial services sector (“Report,” link).  The Report was produced by Oliver Wyman and commissioned by TheCityUK.  The presentation covered the current state of play of financial services in the UK, different scenarios for single market access, and some key recommendations for businesses and professional advisers.

Current state of play

  • The UK financial services sector earns approximately £190-205BN in revenues, and of this, up to £50BN is directly related to European Union activity. (Domestic business and other “Rest of World” interactions were not considered).
  • Together with the 1.1 million people working in financial services around the country, the sector generates an estimated £60-67BN of taxes each year, and contributes a trade surplus of approximately £58BN to the UK’s balance of payment.

Key take-aways

The five important features of a successful future relationship between the UK and EU will require the UK to (as recommended by Oliver Wyman): adhere to global norms, retain current access to international markets, maintain/create equivalence and grandfathering, implement orderly transition arrangements, and maintain ongoing regulatory collaboration.

Read more…

LS Lowry, 1929

The Purposeful Company?

Last month I attended “The Purposeful Company: a healthy prescription for UK public companies?” at the London School of Economics. The lecture was based upon a recent report published by the Big Innovation Centre (“BIC”) and focused on proposed changes to Company Law and Regulation, aimed at fostering a culture of corporate purpose. The presentation covered the importance of corporate purpose, the implications and failures of the current legal and economic ecosystem, and proposals for legislators, investors, and companies alike moving forward.

Read below for my notes on what it means to have corporate purpose, shareholder commitment to corporate vision, and proposals for decision makers.

Read more…

Lava Law: Geothermic energy in Iceland & the UK

Iceland straddles one of the Earth’s major fault lines, the Mid-Atlantic ridge. Here I am, at Þingvellir (Thingvellir) in Iceland – one of the few places on Earth where you can see an active spreading ridge above sea level. Essentially, I’m standing in the rift between the North American and Eurasian tectonic plates!

Apart from being a really awesome and symbolic place for my husband and I to visit (he’s English, and I’m American), Iceland’s rifts and stunning geology play an active role in the country’s energy sector.


While there are different ways in which to capture geothermal energy, the most popular method is from naturally occurring hydrothermal convection systems. Put simply, water which has been heated by the Earth’s internal convection rises to the surface. The steam produced is then directed to spin turbines, which is then converted into electrical energy.

To put this in perspective for Icelanders, this geothermal heating system meets the heating and hot water requirements of approximately 87% of all buildings in Iceland!


Nesjavellir Combined Heat and Power Plant is a high-enthalpy geothermal system within the Hengill area of Southwest Iceland. The plant is a combined geothermal heat and power plant (CHP) wherein it generates electricity and hot water for district heating.


While most of Europe lacks Iceland’s dramatic volcanic activity, there is still a substantial resource of geothermal energy across the European continent.

The European Commission notes that geothermal energy “has the potential for much more widespread use, and to make a significant contribution to the 2020 renewable energy targets established in the European Union.”

Several years ago, Irish based geoservices consultancy CSA Group headed up the GeoThermal Regulation – Heat (“GTR-H”) project to investigate current legal frameworks of geothermal heat legislation and regulation. The results of this study were that deficient or “effectively absent” regulations in Poland, Hungary, Ireland and the UK can identify the barriers to development and harmonisation in the sector.

Conversely, regulations in Germany, France and The Netherlands were found to be “effective and forward looking.” These national frameworks could prove to be a starting point for the development of a European-wide regulatory system.

Of course, with the United Kingdom set to leave the European Union within the next few years, the likelihood of such legislation having an impact on British geothermal capture is likely to be minimal – at least officially. One of the great benefits of being part of the EU and other transnational organisations – in my opinion – is the sharing of resources, knowledge, and expertise in tackling global issues such as climate change.

Despite the Brexit doom and gloom, it’s worth noting that I’m still optimistic about the willingness of Government to reach out and learn from our neighbours. Reading into this topic led me to discover that as recently as 2012, the UK government signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Iceland regarding geothermal energy.

One of the key points of this agreement was to “explore the possibility of developing electricity interconnection between Iceland and the UK,” which includes relevant legal and regulatory issues.

Meanwhile, Stoke-on-Trent City Council in Staffordshire, England is set to commence a geothermal feasibility study for a £52m geothermal infrastructure project. So who knows – maybe there’s a Viking god they could consider naming it after?

Magna Carta and the Forgotten Forest Charter

This weekend, my fiancé and I went to the British Library for the Magna Carta exhibition. As we went early in the morning, at one point we were completely alone in the gallery, our noses pressed up against the glass to view an original manuscript in full detail! It was inspiring to see such a famous artefact in person, especially as a trainee lawyer.

However, the document I was left thinking about wasn’t Magna Carta at all, but its rather unknown companion, Carta de Foresta, or the Charter of the Forest. What is this Charter, and might it have even greater significance to British History and Legal Philosophy than Magna Carta itself? 

New Forest has heaths instead of mountains, and is actually the most extensive area of heathland remaining in Europe.

In the Middle Ages, ​”​forest​ ​land”​ included fields, heathland, and villages, as well as wooded areas. William the Conqueror created the first “Royal Forest” in 1079, naming it Nova Foresta, or “New Forest.” In so doing, he also introduced the first Forest Laws to protect both wildlife and the plants that such animals depended upon for food and shelter.

While Royal Forests may sound like an enviro-friendly idea, in actuality these were restrictive hunting grounds for the King’s use only. Before 1079, land had been held in common: it was in essence owned by everyone and yet no-one. This allowed ordinary people (“commoners”) access to hunt or forage for food and gather fallen timber. But the introduction of Royal Forest laws established severe, and sometimes fatal, consequences for living off of the land. For disturbing a deer your punishment might be having an eye or hand removed. Poaching deer – even if only to feed your hungry family – could warrant the death penalty.

The New Forest is home to fallow, roe, sika and red deer.

Successive Norman Kings continued to protect more and more land under the Crown, thereby expanding their wealth and abusive powers. By the 13th century, almost half of the English territory was considered Royal Forest! This system of Royal Forest creation proved to be a lucrative source of income. Firstly, not only had ordinary people lost permission to utilise forest land, but very rarely did they understand what their few remaining rights were. As such, the fines and penalties they paid went straight into the Royal purse. Secondly, the King could also sell licences to the nobility, allowing them a certain quota for hunting and logging.

In June of 1215, King John was forced by a group of rebellious Barons to accept the “Articles of the Barons,” a peace treaty which increased the Baron’s powers while limiting those of the King.

Several clauses aimed to reform Forest Law, promising to “disafforest” the Royal Forests created by King John. This didn’t mean that the trees would be chopped down: it simply meant the land would be removed from the King’s ownership. As a result, the Barons regained the ability to hunt and utilise the land without fear of punishment.

This example of the 1225 Forest Charter, one of three surviving originals, is sealed by King Henry III.

However, various features of the Articles of the Barons continued to be contentious, and further debate led to its reissue in 1217. It was at this point named Magna Carta, and published concurrently with a separate Forest Charter. While Magna Carta spoke mainly of the rights of the Barons, Carta de Foresta also addressed the rights of ordinary people and restored traditional rights.

Subsequently, cases of Forest Law were adjudicated in courts rather than by royal representatives. Officers of the Crown could no longer arrest someone for poaching without evidence, and the death penalty for such a crime was abolished. Gradually, strenuous efforts from local communities led to further reductions in the size of the Royal Forests.

As somewhat of a proto-Socialist treatise of coordinated restrictions upon individual privatisation, the Forest Charter allowed ordinary English people to reassert their liberties and livelihoods vis-à-vis the Crown. I believe this is incredibly significant in the history of legal and political theory. And impressively, the Charter remained in force until 1971, when the Wild Creatures and Forest Laws Act was passed – and the specialised Forest Courts still exist in New Forest and the Forest of Dean.

You can read the full text of Carta de Foresta – it’s neither long nor complicated!

The Big Smoke: ClientEarth v Defra in context

Efforts to combat air pollution in London have been around since the Middle Ages. In 1307, King Edward II declared that “whoever shall be found guilty of burning coal [in the City] shall suffer the loss of his head.” Three hundred years later, English author John Evelyn published one of the earliest known publications on air pollution, entitled “Fumifugium: or, the Inconveniencie of Aer and Smoak of London Dissipated.”


Evelyn wrote in his diaries that in London, “the ascent of the smoke was so filled with the [sooty] steam of the coal, that hardly could one see across the street, and this filling the lungs with its gross particles, exceedingly obstructed the breast so as one could scarcely breathe.”

In the 19th century, Parliament took some measures to investigate nuisances arising from smoke pollution. However, as smoke was essential to England’s rapidly-growing industrial economy, and because the physicians were still unable to prove that air pollution was linked to health problems, there was little political will or social pressure to justify tough action.

This remained the status quo until the 1950s, when in December 1952, London experienced the Great Smog. A combination of cold winter weather, heavy fog, and chimney smoke from households burning coal led to the worst air pollution event in British history. Up to 12,000 people are believed to have died as a result, with a further 100,000 being taken seriously ill. In response, scientific research into the environmental increased, awareness grew of the relationship between air quality and health, and of course, more substantial government regulations were introduced.

Nevertheless, air pollution is still estimated to have an effect equivalent to 29,000 deaths each year and is expected to reduce life expectancy of everyone in the UK by 6 months on average, at a cost of around £16 billion per year (UK Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs).

Smog over the Thames - a sight familiar to Londoners, myself included!

Smog over the Thames – a sight familiar to Londoners

Earlier this year, activist environmental lawyers at ClientEarth took the UK Government to court over its failure to meet air quality standards established by European Union law. The Air Quality Directive sets legally binding limits for major air pollutants that impact public health, including Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) which is produced by road traffic and other fossil fuel combustion processes.

Scientists at King’s College London have said that many roads in central London have the highest concentrations of NO2 in the world due to the large number of diesel vehicles and narrow streets with tall buildings.

The current plans from the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) would see the UK achieve compliance for NOlimits by 2030 – which is 20 years after the original EU legal deadline of January 2010.

The Mayor of London published a report by King’s College London in July 2015 with the world’s first estimates for the number of deaths attributable to long-term exposure to NO. They estimated 9,400 deaths from fine particles and NO in London in 2010, making air pollution worse than smoking for the first time.

Lord Carnwath reasoned that there was no doubt in the seriousness of the breach, or the responsibility of the UK Supreme Court to secure compliance. He concluded that the Government needs to take immediate action, and ordered that new plans must be delivered to the European Commission by 31 December 2015.

Activists gather outside the UK Supreme Court for the Final Hearing of ClientEarth v Defra

Alan Andrews is the Partner at ClientEarth who has been leading this legal battle since 2011. Following the decision he said, “obviously we set EU law precedent, and we hope that’s going to allow citizens to go before national courts and uphold their right to breathe clean air, but also to enforce other environmental laws.”

Read the full judgement of R (on the application of ClientEarth) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Respondent) here.