Exit meaning

How to use this Checklist This Checklist flags common matters that arise when negotiating and drafting agreements to transfer intellectual property rights (IPRs) in a website. Many of the same points are also pertinent to other types of transaction. Key commercial considerations technical and functional requirements defining the relevant IPRs any cross‑licensing arrangements the terms underpinning the transfer of rights rights held by third parties Use the third column to capture observations or remarks as you work through the Checklist. Checklist for the transfer of intellectual property rights in a website &x2610; Verify each party’s legal status and whether any third parties (such as group affiliates) will benefit from the proposed agreement. &x2610; Confirm when the transfer becomes effective and whether it is contingent on any other agreements or events. &x2610; Confirm if the deal is a one‑off assignment of IPRs or if there will be ongoing licensing or support; where continuing...

This Checklist This Checklist highlights the different avenues for bringing a joint venture (JV) to a close or facilitating an exit, and the factors to weigh depending on the pathway chosen. For guidance on addressing a JV dispute, see Practice Note: Joint venture disputes—how to respond. For further detailed guidance on terminating joint ventures where a specially created or nominated joint venture company (JVC) is involved, see the following Practice Notes: Termination—corporate joint ventures Tax implications of operating and terminating a joint venture company Corporate joint venture dispute—dealing with deadlock: initial considerations Majority-minority joint venture dispute—a practical illustration Entering a JV relationship usually calls for significant planning and effort from the JV parties, who opt to work together for mutual advantage (often by sharing cost, resources and expertise). You will need to assess the full ramifications of ending or exiting the JV, including whether there are sound reasons to be prepared to see that investment lost if the JV is...

Checklist This Checklist sets out key provisions commonly included in a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) agreement, under which a mobile network operator, as Supplier, provides wholesale access for resale to the MVNO’s own retail customers. It focuses on provisions specific to this type of contract. See also the Precedent: MVNO agreement. Definitions Agreement – the MVNO agreement between the MVNO and the Supplier for the provision of the Services End-User – a customer of the MVNO IPR – intellectual property rights MVNO – mobile virtual network operator, the customer in the Agreement Services – the wholesale network services provided to the MVNO by the Supplier Supplier – the mobile network operator supplying network services to the MVNO The third column can be used to capture observations or comments as the Checklist is completed. General terms and conditions ☐ Consider the term. The term typically reflects the level of bespoke development and investment...

ARCHIVED: 11 pm (GMT) on 31 December 2020 signalled the conclusion of the Brexit transition/implementation phase that followed the UK’s exit from the EU. At that moment in time (known in UK legislation as ‘IP completion day’), the principal transitional provisions finally ceased. From IP completion day, the UK is unable to take an active role in the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), as EAWs apply solely to Member States...

Flowchart This Flowchart sets out the questions to consider when deciding the applicable law in employment matters, namely which legal system governs an employment contract or employment relationship, and guides the assessment to identify the applicable rules in such cases. Brexit has no significant practical effect in this field. The reason is that Article 66 of the Withdrawal Agreement preserves the existing Rome I and Rome II framework beyond IP completion day (11 pm on 31 December 2020), ensuring continuity of approach. That position is implemented domestically by the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations and Non Contractual Obligations (Amendment etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/479, which took effect on IP completion day and applies for employment cases...

Select this link to open or print the full-size PDF:...

The Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v HMRC [2024] EWCA Civ 300 The Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (Prudential) acted as the representative member of its VAT group. Another company in the group, Silverfleet Capital Ltd (SCL), executed an investment management services contract to provide services to Prudential. Under that contract, SCL was also eligible for a management fee and deferred performance fees once a specified hurdle rate was achieved. Under section 43 of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (VATA 1994), no VAT was payable on the management fee because they were in the same VAT group. In 2007, SCL exited the VAT group. In 2014 and 2015, the triggers for paying the further deferred performance fee were satisfied and SCL invoiced Prudential for over £9m in total. The question before the Court of Appeal was whether those additional performance fees ultimately constituted consideration for a supply made while both companies were members of the same VAT group or, alternatively, whether the services amounted to a continuous supply of services...

In this issue: Criminal procedure and evidence Proceeds of crime Appeal and judicial review Sentencing Bribery, corruption, sanctions and export controls Cybercrime and data protection offences Environmental offences Financial services and pensions offences Food safety and hygiene offences Fraud, forgery, tax and theft offences Health and safety and corporate manslaughter offences Local authority prosecutions Money laundering International LexTalk®Corporate Crime: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Criminal procedure and evidence Court delays soar as backlogs break records Between April and June 2025, the criminal courts in England and Wales amassed an unprecedented caseload of almost 440,000, with incoming matters exceeding disposals and a system hampered by long-standing funding shortfalls. In response, the Ministry of Justice (MOJ), together with The Rt Hon David Lammy MP, confirmed extra resources to accelerate outcomes for...

Phillips v The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin), [2024] All ER (D) 49 (Jan) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling is among a number of recent first-instance judgments in which the Administrative Court has scrutinised the lawfulness of sanctions listings made under the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/855 (the Russia Regulations). The broad approach the court ought to take to claims of this kind was the focus of submissions before the Court of Appeal in Shvidler v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, at a hearing held between 17–19 January 2024, where judgment remains reserved. Until the Court of Appeal delivers its decision, practitioners must look to these first-instance decisions for direction. The ruling in Phillips also examines aspects of the legal framework that previous authorities have not addressed in earlier cases...

Family business culture Given the relatively high expense of sourcing and appointing senior staff, holding on to the right people with the right expertise is vital for any firm, and even more so for a family-run enterprise where hiring can be tougher than for rivals. Working in a family company brings upsides; research points to greater loyalty, satisfaction, flexibility and security. Yet drawbacks can appear, such as ambiguity, perceived unfairness, muddled accountability and family politics. The task is to bring in senior leaders who align with the culture and to ensure they are incentivised to remain and help grow the business. Therefore, a family business must shape recruitment and induction so they reflect its distinctive culture and complexity. Not every senior executive will thrive in a family setting, and cultural alignment may, in the end, matter as much as formal credentials. This must be weighed against the need to attract high-calibre people and keep them engaged for the long haul. Practical measures available to family firms include supporting new...

The enterprise investment scheme (EIS) It is primarily intended to boost investment in smaller, higher‑risk trading companies by granting a range of tax reliefs to individual investors who acquire newly issued shares in such companies. The EIS rules are prescriptive and contain numerous conditions that must be satisfied, including those relating to: the individual investors the issued shares the issuing company This Practice Note centres on the conditions that apply to the individual investor. Those conditions are outlined in the context of the income tax relief afforded by Part 5 of the Income Tax Act 2007 (ITA 2007). References to the equivalent capital gains tax (CGT) provisions are included where appropriate. For information on the remaining conditions, see the following Practice Notes: EIS—conditions for relief: issued shares, the funds raised and the arrangements in general EIS—conditions for relief: issuing company EIS—conditions for relief: qualifying trades For a summary of tax reliefs available...

Money Laundering Regulations 2017 and Money Laundering Regulations 2020 The Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (MLR 2017), SI 2017/692, sit within the UK’s anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing framework. They took effect on 26 June 2017 to implement the EU’s Fourth Anti-Money Laundering Directive, Directive (EU) 2015/849 (4MLD), and have subsequently been broadened significantly by the Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (MLR 2020), SI 2020/991. Those 2020 amendments give effect to aspects of the EU’s Fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive, Directive (EU) 2018/843 (5MLD), concerning the registration of trusts. The Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (Amendment) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/1511, also transposed elements of 5MLD into UK law; however, they addressed areas other than trust registration and therefore fall outside the ambit of this Practice Note. Unless indicated otherwise, references in this Practice Note to MLR 2017, SI 2017/692, should be read as including the changes introduced by MLR 2020, SI 2020/991. The chief focus of...

[ insert date of letter ] [ insert name of employee ] [ insert address of employee ] Dear [ insert name of employee ] [ insert name of Company ] (the Company ) I am pleased to inform you that the directors of the Company have authorised the award of an enterprise management incentives (EMI) option ( Option ) to you. Enclosed is a copy of the option agreement, which must be signed by you and the Company for the grant of the Option to become effective. The Option gives you the right to purchase [ insert maximum number and class of shares which can be exercised pursuant to the Option agreement ] shares in the Company ( Shares ) at a price of [ insert exercise price of shares ] per Share [ upon an ‘Exit’ event of the Company (which broadly means a takeover of the Company [ , an asset sale or a listing of its shares ] [ , a...

This Agreement is dated [ insert date ] Parties [ Insert name of investee company ], a company incorporated in England and Wales with number [ insert company number ], whose registered office is at [ insert address ], with brief particulars set out in Schedule 1 (the Company) The several persons whose names and addresses appear in Part A of Schedule 2 (together, the Founders) [ The several persons whose names and addresses appear in Part B of Schedule 2 (together, the Other Shareholders) and ] [ Insert name of investor ] [ incorporated in England and Wales under number [ insert company number ] whose registered office is at OR of ] [ insert address ] (the Investor) [ (each of the Company, the Founders, the Other Shareholders and the Investor is a Party and, together, the Company, the Founders, the Other Shareholder and the Investor are the Parties). ] BACKGROUND The Investor has agreed to...

This agreement is dated [ insert day and month ] 20[ insert year ] Parties [ Insert name of company in which the shares are held ], incorporated in England and Wales with company number [ insert company number ] and having its registered office at [ insert address ] (the Company), [ Insert name of company in which the shares are held ], incorporated in England and Wales with company number [ insert company number ] and having its registered office at [ insert address ] (Newco 2), [ Insert name of company in which the shares are held ], incorporated in England and Wales with company number [ insert company number ] and having its registered office at [ insert address ] (Newco 3), The various persons named and addressed in Schedule 1 (together, the Managers), and The various persons named and addressed in Schedule 3 and any other such person as defined in clause 1.4 (the Investors) ...

We proceed on the basis that the default legacy will take the form of a discretionary trust in favour of the testator’s grandchildren and does not create an immediate post-death interest (IPDI) trust under section 49A of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984). We further assume that it is not a disabled trust within IHTA 1984, s 89...

Practice Note: Relevant property trusts—the principal (ten-year) charge within the Trusts—inheritance tax subtopic For details on the inheritance tax (IHT) rules applicable to discretionary trusts under the relevant property regime, see Practice Note: Relevant property trusts—the principal (ten-year) charge within the Trusts—inheritance tax subtopic...

A person with an interest in property that has been disclaimed (for instance, a sub-tenant) retains that interest on the same terms and subject to the same rights and obligations as if no disclaimer had occurred. If they carry out the tenant’s obligations under the disclaimed lease, they cannot be removed; if they do not, the landlord may distrain or forfeit—as explained by Lord Nicholls in Hindcastle Ltd v Barbara Attenborough Associates Ltd: the sub-tenant’s interest is unaffected by the determination of the tenant’s interest. Thus the sub-tenant holds the estate on identical terms, and remains subject to the same rights and obligations, as would apply if the tenant’s interest had continued. If they pay the rent and perform the tenant covenants in the disclaimed lease, the landlord cannot evict them. If they fail to do so, the landlord may distrain upon their goods for the rent reserved by the disclaimed lease or commence forfeiture proceedings...