Additional claim meaning

Introduction to freezing injunctions and scope of this checklist A freezing injunction (also known as a freezing order) is a temporary court order that prevents a respondent from disposing of or transferring its assets out of the relevant jurisdiction—namely England and Wales—or, in the case of a worldwide freezing order (WFO), from moving them anywhere in the world. The court’s principal aim in granting such relief is to preserve the respondent’s assets so that, if the applicant later obtains judgment against the respondent, there will be assets available for recovery by the applicant and, if necessary, enforcement action. This Checklist explains how to make an application for a freezing injunction where claims are contemplated or already underway in a corporate or personal insolvency context. As the precise circumstances of each matter must be assessed, this Checklist does not claim to be exhaustive; rather, it provides an overview of the key considerations at each stage when seeking an order of this kind. The focus throughout is asset preservation pending determination...

This Checklist sets out the key points to consider when advising a prospective claimant on a potential breach of warranty claim arising from a share purchase agreement (SPA). The same broad approach will apply to an asset purchase agreement (APA). For additional guidance on breach of warranty claims, see the related content links on the right-hand side. Read this Checklist together with Practice Note: Starting an SPA breach of warranty claim—a practical guide... Action Comments Review the SPA Check the: governing/choice of law provisions — is the agreement governed by English law? jurisdiction provisions — do the English courts have jurisdiction? warranty provisions and warranty limitation provisions — does the issue fall within the warranties and are you within the time limit to bring a breach of warranty claim? Note all deadlines in the agreement that could be relevant to any potential warranty claim... Review the disclosure letter Confirm that the issue has not been disclosed against...

This timetable sets out the key procedural steps for disclosure under the Disclosure Scheme operating in the Business and Property Courts It outlines the required process, spanning document preservation duties, Initial Disclosure, completion of the Disclosure Review Document (DRD), Extended Disclosure, and the actions to be taken at and following the case management conference (CMC). Document preservation obligations Initial Disclosure Disclosure Review Document (DRD) Extended Disclosure Steps at and after the CMC For these purposes, it is assumed the parties are legally represented. Note: this timetable does not cover disclosure under CPR 31. For additional guidance on CPR 31 disclosure, see: Disclosure-overview. The Disclosure Scheme is mandatory for most claims in the Business and Property Courts under CPR PD 57AD (in force from 1 October 2022). To assess whether the Scheme applies to a particular claim, see: Which disclosure rules apply to my claim-flowchart? and the Practice Notes: Disclosure Scheme-definitions, principles and duties; Disclosure Scheme-when and where it...

Flowchart This Flowchart outlines the key questions for deciding international jurisdiction in employment matters—namely, the appropriate forum for bringing proceedings and identifying the court and/or tribunal competent to hear the claim—applicable to proceedings commenced on or after 1 January 2021. For additional guidance on jurisdiction in employment disputes from 1 January 2021 onwards, consult Practice Note: International jurisdiction—the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 in employment cases as set out therein...

Flowchart This Flowchart sets out the procedural steps where a claim arises under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (I(PFD)A 1975). For additional guidance on I(PFD)A 1975 claims, please refer to: Family provision claims—overview...

Clause 20.2 claims flowchart summary (FIDIC 2017) This flowchart describes the process for claims by the Contractor or Employer under clause 20.2 of the FIDIC Red and Yellow Books 2017, and applies to the following: Employer claims for the following: additional payment or a decrease in the Contract Price; and/or an extension of the Defects Notification Period Contractor claims for the following: additional payment; and/or an extension to the Time for Completion The party making a claim must also meet any specific requirements found in the clause setting out the relevant entitlement. For more information, see Practice Note: FIDIC contracts 2017—Contractor and Employer claims...

In this issue: New technologies Internet Media Advertising, marketing and sponsorship LexTalk®TMT: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q&As Useful information New technologies Getty Images drops Stability AI copyright infringement claims from UK trial MLex reports that on 25 June 2025 Getty Images abandoned its direct copyright infringement claims against image generator Stability AI during the first day of closing submissions in a landmark three‑week High Court hearing in London. It is still pursuing allegations of trade mark infringement, passing off, secondary copyright infringement and issues around licensing, yet the move is a setback for the UK’s creative sector, which had sought clear precedent to provide broad copyright protection in the UK against AI models’ web scraping. See: Getty Images drops Stability AI copyright infringement claims from UK trial. IAB Tech Lab proposes framework for AI content usage compensation...

In points of defence lodged on 7 March 2025, Tesco informed the High Court that, while its Clubcard logo might have suggested to shoppers that its prices were comparable with Lidl’s, the approach also brought disadvantages for the UK retailer, and it should therefore not be compelled to pay additional losses. The pleading states that the logo conferred benefits by implying a price‑matching campaign, but any such upside was ultimately outweighed by associated drawbacks. Lidl succeeded in April 2023 with its claim that its competitor had infringed its intellectual property. At that stage, a High Court judge found that the Clubcard programme’s iconography called to mind Lidl’s branding and took unfair advantage of its reputation for low prices. In 2024, Tesco failed to convince the Court of Appeal that its Clubcard branding did not infringe the German discounter’s trade mark. However, the appellate court did set aside part of the High Court’s ruling relating to Tesco’s branding...

In this issue: Key developments and horizon scanning Leasing property Environment, energy and buildings Statutory compliance Property development Transferring property Property taxes Property in Scotland Additional property updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts Trackers New Q&As Key developments and horizon scanning Snapshot of key property developments to look out for in 2025 We deliver a concise overview of several significant property developments to watch for in 2025. See News Analysis: Snapshot of key property developments to look out for in 2025. Leasing property Electronic Communications Code and assignment of pre-28 December 2017 licence agreement AP Wireless II (UK) Ltd v ON Tower UK Ltd [2024] UKUT 429 (LC) was an appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) (the UT) from a First-tier Tribunal (FTT) decision concerning how the Electronic Communications Code (Code) should be interpreted. The central question was whether an assignee of a Code licence...

SME R&D relief—additional deduction (pre-1 April 2024) This Practice Note addresses the principal research and development (R&D) relief for small or medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) for accounting periods beginning before 1 April 2024, subject to transitional provisions. For further detail, see Practice Note: SME R&D relief—tax credit (pre-1 April 2024). For the R&D expenditure credit that applies to periods beginning before 1 April 2024, see Practice Note: R&D expenditure credit (pre-1 April 2024). In this Practice Note, these two are collectively described as the pre-1 April 2024 schemes. For guidance on the schemes of relief for R&D generally applying to accounting periods beginning on or after 1 April 2024, see Practice Notes: The merged R&D expenditure credit (post-1 April 2024) and Enhanced relief for R&D-intensive loss-making SMEs (post-1 April 2024). SME R&D relief—additional deduction Where the relevant conditions are satisfied, an SME company may claim an additional deduction equal to 186% of its qualifying research and development (R&D) expenditure when computing profits chargeable to corporation tax...

This Practice Note outlines the principles governing the calculation and use of the basic nil rate band (NRB) and the transferable NRB on death, and flags key practical points on the operation of those calculations. For broader guidance on the NRB, the transferable NRB and the residence NRB (RNRB) (also called the additional threshold), including how to claim these reliefs and the relevant time limits, see Practice Notes: IHT—nil rate band (NRB) and transferable NRB and IHT—residence nil rate band. Nil rate band The NRB removes a significant slice of a deceased person’s estate from inheritance tax (IHT), and in many cases eliminates any IHT liability altogether. The current NRB threshold is £325,000, which produces an IHT saving of £130,000. In the RNRB context, which applies to deaths on or after 6 April 2017, the NRB is sometimes described as the basic NRB. For historic threshold figures, see: HMRC: IHT thresholds and interest rates. In certain cases, the free estate on death may not secure the whole of...

Taxation regime What factors determine tax liability in your jurisdiction (eg domicile, residence or citizenship)? Türkiye’s tax landscape is intricate, operating through numerous laws, regulations, communiqués and subsequent amendments. The key legislative instruments include: Tax Procedure Law No. 213 (10 January 1961) Corporate Tax Law No. 5520 (21 June 2006) Value Added Tax Law No. 3065 (2 November 1984) Stamp Tax Law No. 488 (11 July 1964) Income Tax Law No. 193 (6 January 1961) Broadly, the Turkish Tax System is considered under three headings: (i) income taxes, such as individual income tax and corporate income tax; (ii) taxes on expenditure, including Value Added Tax (VAT), the Banking and Insurance Transactions Tax and Stamp Tax; and (iii) taxes on wealth, for example Property Tax and Inheritance and Gift Tax. For natural persons, residency, ownership of property and citizenship are key in determining which taxes apply in Türkiye. An individual’s tax burden is mainly linked to their earnings,...

[ Insert in para 8.2 of claim form ET1: ] I serve as a [ magistrate ] and, to discharge my responsibilities, require [ 20 ] days away from work each year. From [ insert date ], the Respondent has permitted only [ 15 ] days’ absence to carry out these functions [ plus an additional [ 5 ] days relating to my role as a governor of a maintained school ]. On [ insert date ] I requested further leave on [ insert date ] to undertake my magistracy, yet the Respondent declined the request without reasonable grounds. Those extra absences would not have detrimentally impacted the Respondent’s business operations. My claim is for: a declaration that my claim is well-founded; compensation. ...

Case No: [ Insert case number ] Between: [ INSERT NAME OF CLAIMANT ] (Claimant) and [ INSERT NAME OF RESPONDENT ] (Respondent) [ CLAIMANT’S OR RESPONDENT’S OR AGREED ] LIST OF ISSUES Jurisdiction—time limits In respect of the detriment claim, was the Claimant’s claim lodged within time, having regard to the ‘stop the clock’ effect of early conciliation? (Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996), ss 48(3)(a), 207B) If not, was it not reasonably practicable for the Claimant to present the claim in time? (ERA 1996, s 48(3)(b)) If so, was the claim made within such additional period as was reasonable? (ERA 1996, s 48(3)(b)) In respect of the dismissal claim, was the Claimant’s claim lodged in time, taking into account the ‘stop the clock’ provisions relating to early conciliation? (ERA 1996, ss 111(2)(a), 207B) If not, was it not reasonably practicable for the Claimant to submit the claim in time? (ERA 1996, s 111(2)(b)) If so,...

Note: this letter is prepared in broad terms without reference to any particular scenario. You should adapt the letter where you are advising on an identified employee and the specific facts. Where the employer operates its own performance and capability procedure (or a disciplinary process addressing inadequate performance), you must refer back to that policy throughout the letter, linking each stage of the process and any time limits set within it. You may discover that the employer’s procedure requires additional warnings or imposes other steps. This letter proceeds on the basis that performance review periods will be shorter than the duration of any warnings issued. Ensure cross-references appear at each stage and that all stated deadlines are meticulously observed throughout the procedure. [ name and address of client ] Dear [ name ] Performance and capability procedure I write to outline my advice on running a performance and capability process for an employee whose performance falls below the required standard. The principal legal exposure, if the...

Possession claims following the standard procedure Possession claims brought via the standard route (as opposed to the accelerated route) permit a landlord, under CPR PD 55A, para 1.7, to add a further claim within the possession action for rent arrears or damages. One claim form may cover every head of claim, and both the rent arrears element and the possession claim can be determined together in the same proceedings. However, where the landlord opts for the accelerated route for possession, the claim must be limited to possession alone and cannot include any additional relief, such as rent arrears or damages, in accordance with CPR 55.12...

In responding to this Q&A, the following assumptions are made: the land is not a residential property the land is registered the period of possession occurred after October 2013 and the 'new rules' apply to it Definitions used for clarity: the owner is 'the registered proprietor' the third party is 'the squatter' For a squatter to pursue an adverse possession claim against the registered proprietor, the squatter must demonstrate, for the requisite period of ten years, that both of the following are satisfied: the claimant enjoyed uninterrupted factual possession of the land for that period ('factual possession'); and the claimant intended to possess the land throughout that period ('intention to possess') These elements must be established across the whole of that period. Factual Possession To establish factual possession, the squatter must have exercised a sufficient degree of exclusive physical control over the land. What amounts to...

Background Part 20 exists to ensure counterclaims and other additional claims are handled in the most practical and efficient way (CPR 20). Claim The route for any counterclaim varies according to whether proceedings are under Part 7 or Part 8. A probate claim must be started under the Part 7 procedure (CPR 57.3(b)). For Part 57 purposes, a ‘probate claim’ covers an application for a decree affirming or denying the validity of a purported will (CPR 57.1(2)(a)(iii)). Counterclaim Where a defendant maintains that they have any claim concerning the grant of probate of the deceased person’s Will, they must advance that position by serving a counterclaim (CPR 57.8(1))...