DBT statutory Guidance, published on 6 March 2026, details how “ significant influence or control “ should be interpreted in relation to (1) companies and (2) LLPs.

A subsidy control challenge failed, including on the basis of DELAY, in NEW LOTTERY CO LTD v GAMBLING COMMISSION ( 2026 ) CAT 14. THE CAT held that there was NO SUBSIDY, because the COMMERCIAL MARKET OPERATOR ( CMO ) PRINCIPLE , developed in the State Aid era applied, referring at paras 67-92, to case law on the CMO Principle, including the Sky Blue Sports cases in the Court of Appeal and CJEU cases. There was consistency with normal market conditions. Bacon J gives guidance on how the CMO Principle applies in cases where a public authority is pursuing both public policy and commercial objectives, and where there is no actual market comparator.

Streamlined routes may be made under Section 10 of the Subsidy Control Act 2022. They enable public authorities to award subsidies without the requirements to assess them against the Subsidy Control Principles and notify the Subsidy Advice Unit. There are currently streamlined  routes for  Research, Development and Innovation, Energy Usage, and Local Growth. The Department for Business and Trade has now published GUIDANCE on two new streamlined routes ARTS and CULTURE, and COMMUNITY and REGENERATION.

Sections 2-4 inclusive of the Subsidy Control ACT 2022 define “ subsidy”. It includes specific financial assistance which confers an ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE on an enterprise where the benefit to the enterprise is provided in terms that are “ more favourable “ to the enterprise than the terms that might reasonably have been expected to have been  “ available on the market “ to the enterprise. BICKNELL v NHS NOTTINGHAMSHIRE ICB ( 2026 ) EWCA Civ 21 confirms that in competition law  one criterion for determining “ economic “ is whether the entity PARTICIPATES IN A MARKET.

General principles about winding up a company on the JUST AND EQUITABLE ground are set out in ACQUAPOINT LLP v FAN (2025) UKPC 56 at paras 50-57  inc.

At paras 73/74, the Privy Council says that, in a corporate context, EQUITABLE CONSIDERATIONS AS REGARDS THE EXERCISE OF LEGAL RIGHTS will NOT generally apply : particular contractual arrangements may well be inconsistent with the possibility of equitable considerations arising at all or continuing in place.

The COMPETITION and MARKETS AUTHORITY has, on 11 November 2025, published updated GUIDANCE on how its SUBSIDY ADVICE UNIT (SAU) will carry out its SUBSIDY CONTROL functions in the UK subsidy control regime.

In AUBREY WEISS v GREATER MANCHESTER COMBINED AUTHORITY ( 2025 ) CAT 27 the Competition Appeal Tribunal has given its first Judgment on the balance to be struck in judicial review kind challenges under Section 70(1) of the Subsidy Control Act 2022 between on the one hand the protection of commercially confidential information and on the other hand procedural fairness and open justice. The CAT held that the balance in all the circumstances of this case required that the Appellant’s principal decision-maker be admitted to a confidentiality ring in order to review GMCA’s confidential decision-making documents in relation to loans made by the GMCA, both GMCA documents and documents, including pricing information, of the Appellant’s development competitor and recipients of the loans.

The CAT from para 18 considered the relevant law in relation to the subsidy control regime; and from para 21 the relevant law on managing particularly sensitive confidential information during litigation and confidentiality rings. The information to which access was sought was ( para 43 ) highly important for assessing the merits of the case and in deciding what points to take or not take. The CAT at para 57 identified what was comprised in the balancing exercise. It imposed protections to mitigate against risks : paras 58-61 inc.

There has been an updated Direction and Statutory Guidance from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to extend the freedom for local authorities to use eligible capital receipts to fund the revenue costs of projects that deliver ongoing savings or improved efficiency.  The Direction, which revokes and replaces the Direction of the same name issued on 2 August 2022, extends the flexible use of capital receipts to 2030.  It also removes the restriction with respect to redundancy costs that limits the use of the flexibility to statutory redundancy costs  only.  The Direction includes the requirement to submit the planned use of the flexibility in advance of use for each financial year.

A Department for Business and Trade publication provides guidance for public authorities on assessing whether a subsidy or scheme is consistent with  the principles of the Subsidy Control Act 2022.  It covers four areas of detail, to: identify the policy objective, ensuring it addresses a market  failure or equity concern, and determine whether a subsidy is the right tool to use; ensure that the subsidy is designed to create the right incentives for the beneficiary and bring about a change; consider the distortive impacts that the subsidy may have and keep them as low as possible; and carry out the balancing exercise.  Additional guidance on subsidies or schemes of interest and schemes of particular interest has also been published.

It is necessary for a person who contends that their name has been wrongly taken off the Register of Members of a company to apply to the Court for a Order that the Register be rectified, with retrospective effect, putting them back on the Register, in place of the name of the person whose namely wrongly appears on the Register. So held in BLAND v KEEGAN (2024) EWCA Civ 934.