Company charges meaning

Use this Checklist when filing charges at Companies House where a UK company or a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) created the charge on or after 6 April 2013, and also read it alongside Practice Notes: How to register security at Companies House and Registering security at Companies House. For the purposes of Part 25 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) on Company Charges, a 'charge' also covers a mortgage. Accordingly, references to a 'charge' in this Checklist should be understood to include a mortgage. Checklist The fourth column can be used to record observations or comments while progressing through the Checklist, capturing any points as the Checklist is worked through...

This checklist sets out the factors to consider when a company is proposing to grant a floating charge. This checklist proceeds on the basis that an English or Welsh company will grant a floating charge to a lender situated in England or Wales. The company granting the floating charge is the ‘chargor’. The entity receiving the floating charge is the ‘chargee’. The document recording the floating charge is the ‘security document’. For detailed guidance on the nature of floating charges and how they differ from fixed charges, see Practice Note: Fixed and floating charges. For the advantages and disadvantages of taking a floating charge, see Practice Note: Floating charges—advantages and disadvantages. For in-depth considerations when taking a floating charge, see Practice Note: Floating charges. A floating charge may form part of the security package created by a debenture—see Practice Note: Key features of debentures. Debentures typically also include other security interests, such as mortgages, assignments and fixed charges. A floating...

This checklist presents core tax queries to raise with a joint venture counterparty. The goal is to identify the principal UK tax considerations that could arise for the remaining joint venture participant(s) and/or any joint venture vehicle, with those potential matters highlighted in the list. It is assumed that the parties are UK tax resident corporate entities and that any joint venture vehicle will also be UK tax resident. The following Practice Notes give further detail on the UK tax issues signposted in this checklist and highlighted in this checklist as follows: The tax consequences of contractual joint ventures The tax consequences of establishing a joint venture partnership The tax consequences of operating and terminating a joint venture partnership The tax consequences of establishing a joint venture company The tax consequences of operating and terminating a joint venture company The tax consequences of international joint ventures The transfer pricing and joint ventures The tax influences on choice of joint venture...

Banking & Finance—October 2024 case round-up Brierley v Otuo and others [2024] EWHC 2549 (Ch) — Security: cost recovery on legal mortgages The court refused the mortgagee’s appeal against a 28 July 2023 order that barred recovery of sale and enforcement costs on specified properties. The decision followed the established rule on legal mortgages set out in Fisher & Lightwood’s Law of Mortgage (paragraph 55.6). Put simply, unless the mortgage contains an express term, there is no implied duty on the mortgagor to pay the mortgagee’s costs, charges and expenses, so they cannot be recovered from the mortgagor personally, save where personal liability has arisen in the particular case. Nevertheless, those costs are rolled into the secured indebtedness and, as against the mortgagor and anyone with an interest in the equity of redemption, they are treated as part of the amount owing under the security and must be satisfied as a condition of redemption......

Tribunal chair Andrew Lenon KC stated the claimants have a credible chance of showing that Apple’s alleged excessive commissions charged to UK-based app developers for transactions completed on non‑UK storefronts constituted conduct carried out in the UK. In January 2024, Apple sought to have the tribunal strike out the action, which is brought on behalf of more than 1,500 UK‑based app developers over purportedly unfair App Store fees. The company contended that the majority of developers lack a UK claim because most distribution charges arose from purchases made in other countries, relating to the placement and sale of apps. The tech giant’s legal team further submitted that the lawsuit, spearheaded by Norwich Business School professor Sean Ennis, attempts to impose English competition law on charges incurred overseas and on commerce taking place outside the UK...

In this issue: Property management Investigating title Environment, energy and buildings Residential property Statutory compliance Property in Scotland Property in Wales Transferring property Property insolvency Property taxes Additional property updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts Trackers New Q&As Property management Second edition of RICS service charge standard The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) has released the second edition of its professional standard on service charges in commercial property. Compulsory for all RICS-accredited practitioners and aimed at UK property managers and occupiers, it seeks to lift standards and foster greater transparency, fairness and consistency in service charge management and administration. The revision addresses key challenges, including issuing budgets and year-end certificates promptly, works to reduce causes of disputes between landlords and tenants, and offers clearer guidance on resolving disagreements. It also aids the negotiation, drafting, interpretation and operation of leases, ensuring alignment with recognised industry best practice....

This Practice Note explains the two chargeable gains tax reliefs relevant to dealings under a scheme of reconstruction. For a definition of ‘scheme of reconstruction’, refer to the Practice Note: Schemes of reconstruction defined...

The outcome of an administration will frequently hinge on the worth of the company’s assets and the administrator’s capacity to handle those assets freely so as to secure the best possible result for creditors as a whole. The administrator is granted extensive powers to deal with property, including assets encumbered by various forms of security and quasi-security (for example, hire purchase or retention of title arrangements). A key advantage of administration is the protection created by the moratorium against enforcement by creditors, which permits the administrator to proceed without the constraints the company may have experienced before administration. The administrator may intend to sell or otherwise deploy charged property in order to meet one of the purposes of the administration, while, by contrast, a creditor may wish to enforce its security and recover what it is entitled to from a company it regards as at risk. These competing requirements need to be held in balance between administrator and creditor...

CASE HUB ARCHIVED –this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 17 December 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline, commentary and related cases. Case facts Summary of a CMA Chapter I inquiry into suspected fixing of estate agents’ commission charges in Berkshire. Latest development On 15 June 2020, the CMA stated it had obtained legally binding director disqualification undertakings from: (i) Mr Stephen Jones, a director of Richard Worth Holdings Limited and Richard Worth Limited (in administration); and (ii) Mr Neal Mackenzie, a director of Michael Hardy & Company (Wokingham) Limited, Michael Hardy & Company (Lettings) Limited and Geocharbert UK Limited. Mr Jones agreed not to act as a director of any UK company for six and a half years, and Mr Mackenzie agreed to the same period. Parties Michael Hardy & Company (Wokingham) Limited and Geocharbert UK Ltd (together, Michael Hardy) Prospect Estate Agency Limited and Prospect Holdings (Reading) Limited (together,...

This Agreement is hereby entered into on [ insert date ]. Parties [ insert name ], a company duly incorporated in [ England and Wales ] under number [ insert registered number ], whose registered office is at [ insert address ] (Party A); and [ insert name ], a company duly incorporated in [ England and Wales ] under number [ insert registered number ], whose registered office is at [ insert address ] (Party B). Each of Party A and Party B is a party, and together Party A and Party B are the parties. Background The parties are operators of electronic communications networks in accordance with section 32 of the Communications Act 2003. The parties intend to interconnect their networks to enable the sending and the receipt of electronic communications and to furnish each other with services. The parties have settled such interconnection and services on the terms and conditions of this Agreement... ...

date [ date ] Parties [ name of Seller ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with registered office at ] [ address ] [ and whose address for service in England and Wales is [ address ] ] ( Seller ) [ name of Buyer ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with registered office at ] [ address ] [ and whose address for service in England and Wales is [ address ] ] ( Buyer ) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with registered office at ] [ address ] [ and whose address for service in England and Wales is [ address ] ] ( Guarantor ) ] 1 Definitions In this Agreement, the terms set out below shall have the meanings given: ...

This Agreement is dated [ insert date ] (the Commencement Date) and is entered into by the following: Parties [ insert supplier’s name ], a company registered in [ England and Wales ] with company number [ insert company number ], with its registered office at [ insert registered office ] (the Supplier); and [ insert customer’s name ], a company registered in [ England and Wales ] with company number [ insert company number ], with its registered office at [ insert registered office ] (the Customer), each of the Supplier and the Customer being a party, and together the Supplier and the Customer being the parties. Background The Supplier carries on the business of supplying wi-fi services. The Customer intends to enable its personnel and visitors to access a network of wi-fi hotspots. The Supplier proposes to deliver wi-fi services to the Customer so that the Customer may provide its personnel and visitors with...

We proceed on the basis that the company concerned is neither a right to manage (RTM) vehicle administering property under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (an uncommon scenario, as such entities typically assume management separate from freehold ownership) nor a nominee company established to acquire the freehold collectively under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, where the obligations of individual qualifying tenants regarding payment can be governed by a participation agreement. See Practice Notes: Guide to the right to collective enfranchisement under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 and Quick guide to time limits for collective enfranchisement under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993...

In many developments, the freeholder or a right to manage (RTM) company established by the leaseholders accumulates a reserve fund from amounts the leaseholders pay via their service charges. This fund is intended to cushion substantial expenditure—such as repair works required under the leases—by spreading the contributions over several years...