Browse regulations

Post-Brexit amendment to EU-derived food information regulations allowing English alcohol producers to: (1) display ABV as '% alc/vol' notation, (2) express actual alcoholic strength to one decimal place instead of whole/half units, and (3) label wine with a grape variety if it constitutes at least 95% of the wine rather than 100%.

These amendments are deregulatory in nature, reducing burdens on Britain's alcohol industry. Removing them would restrict producer flexibility and consumer information: the '% alc/vol' notation is more informative than '% vol', decimal ABV precision aids consumer choice, and the 95% grape variety rule allows British wineries competitive parity. Britons would be worse off without these provisions as they represent rare post-Brexit liberalizations rather than new restrictions.

This Order combines four existing coroner areas into two new ones: Newcastle-upon-Tyne with North Tyneside to form 'Newcastle and North Tyneside', and West Sussex with Brighton and Hove to form 'West Sussex, Brighton and Hove'. It updates the geographic boundaries for coroner jurisdiction administration effective 1 April 2023.

This is an administrative reorganization that consolidates coroner districts with no apparent cost-benefit analysis or evidence of improved outcomes. While combining administrative areas may seem efficient, such reorganizations frequently create disruption, confusion in jurisdictional boundaries, and transitional costs without clear benefits to citizens. The regulation reflects bureaucratic convenience rather than any market or competitive concern, and represents the kind of low-level administrative tinkering that accumulates without democratic scrutiny — exactly the type of retained instrument that should require affirmative justification to remain on the books.

This statutory instrument amends the Medicines (Products for Human Use) (Fees) Regulations 2016, primarily increasing various regulatory fees charged by the MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency) by approximately 10%. It introduces new fees for the Early Access to Medicines Scheme (EAMS), adds fees for clinical trial annual safety reports, and makes numerous other fee adjustments for services including marketing authorisations, scientific advice, pharmacovigilance, wholesale dealer licences, and inspections.

These fee increases impose additional costs on the pharmaceutical industry at a time when the UK needs to attract investment and compete with the US, EU, and Singapore for pharmaceutical development and manufacturing. Higher regulatory fees are ultimately passed through to the NHS and patients, contributing to medicine cost inflation. The EAMS fees create new barriers to innovative schemes designed to give patients earlier access to treatments. As a user-pays system for regulatory services, these fees represent a tax on healthcare innovation that reduces the competitiveness of UK-based pharmaceutical companies and may drive investment and jobs overseas. The complexity of this amendment (adding to already complex 2016 regulations) compounds compliance costs without demonstrated corresponding benefits.

These Regulations establish the administrative framework for registering higher-risk buildings (primarily high-rise residential) under the Building Safety Act 2022 in England. They set out: the registration process and required information (building details, AP/PAP identities, building certificates); procedures for the regulator to maintain and update the register; grounds and processes for removing buildings from the register; and a formal review/appeal process for decisions not to register, to remove, or to refuse certificates. The PAP must update registration within 14 days of changes, and prescribed timelines govern appeals.

While compliance costs are real, Britons would be materially worse off without this framework. The post-Grenfell safety regime created genuine accountability gaps—without this register, accountability for fire and structural safety in high-rise residential buildings becomes diffuse and unenforceable. The AP/PAP framework creates legal responsibility that can be enforced against. Alternative mechanisms (voluntary databases, local authority records) lack compulsion and cannot ensure consistent accountability across thousands of buildings. The 14-day update requirement, while burdensome, ensures the register reflects current occupancy—a critical safety function when emergency responders need to identify responsible parties rapidly. The review/appeal process provides due process without blocking legitimate safety decisions.

Emergency statutory instrument enacted on 13th March 2023 to facilitate the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank UK Limited following its parent company's collapse in the US. It modifies numerous provisions of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) to allow HSBC UK Bank plc (which acquired SVB UK) to operate under modified regulatory requirements, including relaxed restrictions on financial institution exposures, waived consultation requirements for related rules, and modified rule-making powers for regulators. The modifications enable the execution of the Silicon Valley Bank UK Limited Mandatory Reduction and Share Transfer Instrument 2023.

This was emergency crisis legislation passed in 48 hours without proper scrutiny to modify rules for a specific transaction. While the resolution may have been necessary to prevent contagion, this Order permanently codifies regulatory carve-outs that bypassed normal consultation, transparency, and rule-making requirements designed to protect market integrity. These modifications have no sunset clause and remain on the books indefinitely, even though the SVB UK resolution is now complete. The broad 'for the purposes of, to facilitate, or in consequence of' language creates permanent exceptions rather than time-limited emergency measures. As a matter of principle, regulations that suspend democratic safeguards for individual transactions should expire when the crisis ends.

A technical corrigendum to the Gas Safety (Management) (Amendment) Regulations 2023, correcting a faulty cross-reference from 'Regulation 0' to 'Regulation 14(2)(a)(v)'. It applies the same extent as the provision amended and came into force on 5 April 2023.

This is a purely technical correction that fixes a drafting error in a prior amendment. Deleting it would leave an invalid reference ('Regulation 0') in the statute book, potentially causing confusion, litigation, or enforcement difficulties. It imposes no new regulatory burden or restriction—it merely ensures the amended regulations function correctly.

These Rules amend the Prison Rules 1999 and Young Offender Institution Rules 2000 to revise the adjudication process for prisoner disciplinary charges. They establish criteria for when charges must be referred to an independent adjudicator versus handled by the governor, create complex referral mechanisms between adjudicators and governors, and insert a new provision rescinding the right to legal representation when charges are referred back to the governor by the adjudicator.

These Rules entrench a bureaucratic two-tier adjudication system for prison discipline that adds complexity without commensurate benefit. Critically, the new provision inserted after Rule 53A(3) and 58A(3) explicitly rescinds the right to legal representation when charges are referred back to the governor — a restriction on fundamental rights that cannot be justified by cost-benefit analysis. The complex referral regime between governors and adjudicators creates procedural delays and administrative burden while maintaining state monopoly over dispute resolution in prisons. As retained EU-derived law with no democratic scrutiny since Brexit, this amendment represents continued regulatory accumulation rather than the deregulation Britain needs to restore its competitive dynamism.

This Order amends the Armed Forces and Reserve Forces (Compensation Scheme) Order 2011, effective 10th April 2023. It increases the armed forces independence payment from £156.90 to £172.75, increases Motability payment from £64.50 to £71.00, and adds three new injury descriptors to the compensation tariff (damage to front tooth requiring extraction and treatment, back sprain/strain with disc prolapse requiring surgery beyond 13 weeks, and overuse limb injury without operative treatment). The scheme provides compensation to armed forces personnel for injuries sustained during service.

Without this scheme, armed forces personnel injured in service would bear the full cost of their injuries personally, creating adverse selection problems that private insurers cannot address for combat-related injuries. Military service involves inherent risks that the market cannot adequately price, and removing this compensation would worsen recruitment and retention while leaving injured veterans without support. The adjustments are modest index-linked increases and minor technical additions that maintain an existing, necessary framework for distributing the costs of military service across society rather than concentrating them on individual service members.

These Regulations amend Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 to provide temporary alleviation from airport slot usage requirements for the 2023 summer scheduling period (26 March 2023 to 28 October 2023). They allow up to 5% of slots allocated to an air carrier to be treated as 'operated' even if not flown, provided the carrier held those slots in the equivalent 2022 period, returned them to the coordinator in February 2023, made no new slot requests during a specified window, and has not permanently ceased operations.

This regulation was a COVID-19 pandemic relief measure that has now expired for its specified period. By creating exceptions to the 'use it or lose it' principle, it distorts the efficient allocation of airport slots, protects incumbent carriers from competition, and prevents slots from being reallocated to more active operators. Such ad hoc interventions undermine the market discipline that ensures optimal slot utilization at UK airports.

These Regulations update the Authority to Carry Scheme (Civil Penalties) Regulations 2015 by amending a date reference in the interpretation clause, revoke the superseded 2021 Regulations, and provide transitional provisions for acts done under the 2021 version. The Scheme itself relates to airline passenger security checks before boarding flights to the UK.

This regulation is purely administrative housekeeping—updating a date reference and revoking a superseded predecessor. Deleting it would not remove any regulatory burden; rather, it would leave the 2021 Regulations in force, creating legal confusion. The actual regulatory scheme (passenger security screening requirements) would persist regardless, and if that scheme is objectionable, the critique belongs to the underlying primary legislation, not this machinery amendment.

Tribunal Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2023 - Technical amendments updating references from 'Her Majesty's' to 'His Majesty's' following the accession of King Charles III, and making procedural changes to First-tier Tribunal (War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation Chamber), Upper Tribunal, and Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) rules including: new requirements for written applications and notices, modifications to appeal lapse procedures and response timelines, addition of secure portal document upload provisions, and insertion of a definition for 'mandatory reconsideration'.

These are largely technical housekeeping amendments required by the change in monarch, plus minor procedural modernisations. The costs of deletion would be confusion in tribunal proceedings and regression to inconsistent rules. The secure portal provisions provide optional efficiency without mandating electronic delivery. These amendments do not restrict access to tribunals, impose significant new compliance burdens, or distort market incentives — they merely clarify existing procedural arrangements. The original regulatory framework remains intact; this instrument only tidies and updates it.

Amends the Radio Equipment Regulations 2017 to require hand-held mobile telephones with computer-like capabilities sold in Northern Ireland to comply with EU Regulation 2019/320, ensuring caller location data is transmitted in 999/112 emergency calls. Also makes technical amendments to conformity assessment procedures in regulation 41.

Extends only to Northern Ireland, creating regulatory fragmentation with Great Britain. Mandates specific technical compliance with a retained EU regulation rather than setting a performance outcome — adding compliance costs for manufacturers with no corresponding democratic scrutiny in Parliament. Emergency location capability would be provided voluntarily by manufacturers responding to consumer safety expectations and market competition. The regulation's prescriptive nature and limited geographic scope suggest it was inherited without proper review rather than being the result of deliberate British policy-making.

This Order continues in force the Excise Duties (Surcharges or Rebates) (Hydrocarbon Oils etc.) Order 2022, which would otherwise have expired on 23rd March 2023 under section 2(2) of the Excise Duties (Surcharges or Rebates) Act 1979. The continuation extends the existing hydrocarbon oil excise surcharge/rebate framework until 22nd March 2024.

This is a tax continuation order, not a regulatory burden instrument. Excise duties on hydrocarbon oils are established fiscal measures (fuel duty), not EU-derived regulations subject to the Retained EU Law Act provisions. Parliament has explicitly approved this continuation through proper democratic procedure. While fuel taxation is inherently a policy matter for Government, deleting this would simply lapse existing tax arrangements without advancing free-market objectives, and would create fiscal uncertainty for the Treasury and fuel industry.

A consequential amendment to the Social Security (Contributions) Regulations 2001 that updates one figure in regulation 125(c) from £3.80 to £4.10, effective 6 April 2023. This is a routine re-rating amendment that follows the main National Insurance contribution rate changes.

This regulation imposes no independent regulatory burden - it is purely a mechanical consequential amendment that updates a single figure to maintain consistency with the primary National Insurance regulations being amended simultaneously. Without this change, the statute book would contain contradictory figures. The £0.30 increase reflected in this amendment flows from the primary regulations, not from this instrument's own policy choice. There is no gold-plating, no new compliance requirements, and no competitive distortion - merely technical legal coordination.

These Regulations amend multiple UK statutes governing police retention and disposal of seized vehicles, adding email as a notification method and updating prescribed charges for vehicle removal and retention. Key changes include: new definition of 'email address' for notification purposes; insertion of email as a delivery mechanism for notices; and revised fee tables setting removal charges (£192–£1,089 depending on vehicle weight and condition) and daily retention charges (£13–£45). The regulations apply to England and Wales and Scotland.

These regulations impose government-fixed prices for vehicle removal and retention services, creating a price-controlled regime that suppresses market competition. The prescribed charge tables (some exceeding £1,000 for removal plus daily storage fees) are set by bureaucratic determination rather than market forces, benefiting established operators while harming vehicle owners—often vulnerable individuals already in difficult circumstances. While email notification adds minor administrative efficiency, the core flaw is the price-fixing mechanism itself: by law, recovery operators can only charge these specified amounts regardless of actual service costs or local market conditions. This prevents competitive pricing that would drive efficiency gains and lower costs. A truly competitive market for vehicle recovery services—with transparency requirements rather than price controls—would better serve both vehicle owners and the public interest.