Abatement meaning

In this issue: Business tenancies Disputes and remedies Property Disputes in Scotland LexTalk®Property Disputes: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional Property disputes updates Daily and weekly news alerts Dates for your diary New and updated content Trackers Latest Q&A Business tenancies Competing approaches to a tenant’s ‘holding’ in claims for renewal of business tenancies (Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Medley Assets Ltd) In Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd v Medley Assets Ltd [2024] Lexis Citation 358, a contested application to renew a business tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) was examined. The landlord relied on ground (f), asserting a reasonable need to recover possession to undertake substantial works. A key ancillary question concerned the scope of the tenant’s ‘holding’, hinging on how that term is construed in LTA 1954, s 30, and whether it aligns with or differs from ‘holding’ in LTA 1954, s 32 (the property to be included in any new tenancy)....

In this issue: Social housing Education Children's social care Social care Healthcare Governance Licensing Planning Environmental law and climate change LexTalk®Local Government: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Social housing Homelessness suitability—human rights and religious freedom (Ghaoui v LB Waltham Forest) Reported to be the first ruling to consider Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) alongside the assessment of whether accommodation provided to discharge a homelessness duty under the Housing Act 1996 (HA 1996) is suitable. The appellant maintained that the offer of accommodation to fulfil the main homelessness duty was inappropriate because the respondent council had not properly taken into account the consequences of their decision to keep their children in a local faith school. The appeal was dismissed. The judgment offers guidance to local authority officers and applicants’ representatives on addressing suitability, location...

Mr Stephen Luck v Bracknell Forest Borough Council [2025] EWHC 2984 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling confirms that a disqualifying event for self-build relief can occur at any stage up to the end of the three-year clawback window, including prior to completion. A sale that brings the self-build intention to an end is a disqualifying event under the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, SI 2010/948, reg 54D(2)(a), with the result that the relief is lost and the full CIL becomes due. Accordingly, developers and self-builders should manage CIL actively when schemes evolve or land is disposed of: use the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, SI 2010/948, reg 32 to transfer liability; and rely on the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, SI 2010/948, reg 74B to obtain abatement before the new permission is commenced, and hard-wire these measures and reimbursement obligations into contractual arrangements. The decision further clarifies that collecting authorities cannot invoke the Community...

The core public entitlement on a highway is to go to and fro, and blocking a highway may constitute a criminal offence as well as a civil wrong in tort. Highway authorities carry a statutory obligation to prevent, so far as practicable, the stopping up or obstruction of highways within their respective areas. Criminal offence of obstruction Wilful obstruction of a highway without lawful excuse is also one of a number of criminal offences. Lawful excuse can exist in several situations, including for example: use of statutory powers to plant trees in highways, erect barriers within those highways, or place gates across them; where a landowner has dedicated a highway subject to a restriction that permits an otherwise obstructive feature, such as a pre-existing bridge or an overhanging building; exercise by a frontager of lawful rights to use the highway for access to their premises, including occasional scaffolding. For detailed discussion and a full examination of criminal offences connected with...

Introduction The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a tariff charged on development. Its statutory footing sits in Part 11 of the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008), which authorises the Secretary of State to make regulations to provide for CIL’s imposition. Those rules were introduced as the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (the CIL Regulations), SI 2010/948. CIL covers both England and Wales, though this Practice Note addresses only the method for calculating CIL in England for any planning permission issued on or after 1 September 2019 (or a liability notice, whenever served, relating to such a permission). For assistance on working out the CIL sum payable in Wales, and in England for a permission granted before 1 September 2019 or a liability notice, whenever served, for such a permission, see Practice Note: Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)—calculating CIL in Wales. Context No single provision in the CIL Regulations, SI 2010/948 neatly sets out the precise circumstances in which CIL liability is triggered. Nevertheless, this can be inferred from...

An annuity is a periodic sum paid out of personal estate. See Savery v Dyer (1752) Amb 139 (not reported by LexisNexis®). It is personalty (Parsons v Parsons). An annuity is a legacy, being a bequest of whatever capital is needed to produce the annuity amount. They can be useful where a drip-feed approach is desired. In essence, they are legacies settled by instalments over a beneficiary’s lifetime. The Will ought to specify whether: executors may buy the annuity using estate capital; a sum from income is reserved to finance the purchase; both capital and income are earmarked to fund the purchase; the annuity is acquired during the executors’ lifetimes (if funds permit), with any deferred annuity vesting in trustees on death; Different routes carry different tax consequences, for capital and income. Annuities may arise: inter vivos by deed; by Will; by or under statutory powers Classification of annuities by Will An...

To: [ name ] of [ address ] Please note that: The [ name ] [ District ] [ Borough ] [ City ] Council (the Council) is satisfied that a statutory nuisance [ exists OR is likely to [ occur OR recur ] ] under section 79(1) [ specify which subsection ] of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990), originating from [ the premises at ] [ specify the address of the source of the nuisance ] and resulting from [ describe the matters which are causing the nuisance ]. This abatement notice is issued to you as you are [ the person responsible for the statutory nuisance OR [ the owner OR the occupier of ] the premises ]. What you are required to do [ You are required to abate...

When is grossing up required? For guidance on when grossing-up is needed, see Practice Note: Grossing up and partly exempt estates, particularly the section entitled 'When is grossing up required?'. Note that on death, if the residuary estate passes wholly to non-exempt beneficiaries, grossing up does not arise, whether or not any specific legacy is tax-free or chargeable. Where a specific legacy is tax-free, the nominated sum or item is delivered as given and the relevant IHT is paid from the estate in the usual manner; the residuary estate is then calculated. If grossing up applies and the combined amount of all specific gifts (both chargeable and exempt) exceeds the value transferred, i.e. the free estate for IHT, section 37(2) of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 operates to reduce specific gifts so far as required to bring them down to the value transferred. See: IHTM12086, IHTM12088 and IHTM26180 (which sets out computations where abatement is triggered by grossing up). Further reading: Practice Note:...