Home

On May 8, 2026, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) announced it would withdraw a proposed rule under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) first issued in 2024 that could have required the remediation of a potentially ambiguous category of constituents under RCRA’s “Hazardous Wastes” definition. 

New judicial review proposals for nationally important infrastructure schemes have been announced for consultation by the Treasury, as part of the Government’s ongoing infrastructure planning reforms to speed up the consenting and delivery of infrastructure projects to drive growth.  These are in addition to, and go further than, the judicial review reforms in the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 which reduce the number of attempts a claimant can make to bring a legal challenge to a Development Consent Order.  Those reforms came into force earlier this year. In summary, two new optional mechanisms will be introduced to protect consented infrastructure schemes from unnecessary delays caused by judicial review (JR): A parliamentary authorisation mechanism to give a DCO the same protections as an Act of Parliament which would reduce exposure from JR on all but human rights grounds.  It would be available only to a narrow category of the most critical clean energy projects identified on a case-by-case basis by the Energy Secretary as being of Critical National Importance (CNI) and endorsed by Members of Parliament. The normal DCO process for submission and examination would be followed, but the final decision put before the House of Commons, and a vote held. If approved, the DCO would be afforded a distinct statutory status specified in the underpinning legislation, similar to an Act of Parliament, protecting it from judicial review on issues other than human rights grounds. A challenge window mechanism, for all other NSIPs, including transport and water projects.  The fixed legal challenge window would be updated to allow the Secretary of State (SoS) to address potential legitimate issues before finalising a consent, along with limits on the ability of potential claimants to raise other issues after publication of the final DCO.  The SoS would publish the draft decision, after which the JR period would open. The Secretary of State would then have a period in which s(he) could consider and address issues raised before amending a final DCO. As a consequence, if any JR on the same grounds were subsequently pursued, the Courts would have a clearer basis to refuse permission or relief, making use of the new provisions introduced by the Planning and Infrastructure Act on meritless claims. The law would also be changed so that the courts could refuse permission for a JR to proceed on any issues not brought up during the consent process or challenge window. 

The International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) has revised its Arbitration Rules, effective from 1 June 2026. The new rules have been designed with a “client mindset” and specific focus on increased efficiency and clarity for end users. Clients consistently rank excessive cost and prolonged procedural delays as their biggest complaints about international arbitration. The new ICC Rules seek to address these complaints by removing procedural hurdles and introducing streamlined fast-track options.Here are the main things you need to know about the new rules:

The UK’s financial services reform programme has reached a decisive inflection point, with the publication of the Financial Services & Markets Bill 2026 and the May 2026 Regulatory Initiatives Grid marking a clear shift from policy development to implementation and execution. As a mid‑year update to our Emerging Themes in Financial Regulation & Disputes 2026 outlook, these developments confirm – and refine – the trajectory identified at the start of the year: a move towards a more flexible, growth‑oriented and regulator‑led framework, driven by the interplay of politics, people and technology. This should not be understood as deregulation. Rather, the direction of travel is one of recalibration, with reduced legislative prescription offset by increased supervisory discretion, a broader regulatory perimeter and heightened expectations of accountability – particularly in relation to senior individuals, consumer outcomes and technology‑driven risks. The latest reforms also signal a decisive transition from consultation to delivery, with clearer timelines, more proactive supervisory engagement and a growing emphasis on outcomes‑based regulation. For firms, the message is clear: 2026 is already shaping up to be a busy and consequential year. The pace of change is accelerating, and the regulatory environment is becoming more dynamic, judgement‑based and interventionist, requiring a strategic approach to managing both regulatory risk and opportunity.

The Government has confirmed that it will proceed with its package of reforms to accelerate electricity network deployment following consultation last year. The reforms are focussed on improving the planning and consenting of network infrastructure, extending and clarifying land access rights for operators, and providing greater protections for landowners. The measures are wide-ranging, in some cases going beyond the original proposals in response to consultation feedback, and will require changes to elements of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the Electricity Act 1989, and the DCO Planning Act 2008 consenting regimes. They are expected to be introduced later this year via legislation and updated guidance.