Former civil partner meaning

Checklist and timeline This concise checklist and timetable is prepared from the viewpoint of a claim started under sections 339 and/or 340 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) by a trustee in bankruptcy (trustee). Step/action Time (days) Section/rule Examine the background and circumstances culminating in the debtor’s bankruptcy and the issues underpinning the claim(s) against the respondent(s) (usually those who received the payments/transactions). This encompasses securing the books, papers or records concerning the bankrupt’s estate or affairs that must be handed to the trustee, and conducting interviews with, among others, the bankrupt, the bankrupt’s spouse, former spouse, civil partner or former civil partner, and any person who appears able to provide information about the bankrupt or their dealings, affairs or property, as relevant to the matters in issue. No limit (subject to limitation) IA 1986, ss 365–366 Prepare and issue the application containing the particulars required by Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR...

PI & Clinical Negligence weekly highlights—23 January 2025 In this issue: Public authorities and the state Costs and funding LexTalk®PI & Clinical Negligence: a Lexis®Nexis community LexisNexis® Webinars Daily and weekly news alerts Useful information Public authorities and the state The police owe no general duty to shield individuals from criminal harm, and foreseeability on its own does not create such a duty. Chief Constable of Northamptonshire Police v Woodcock; HD (by their respective litigation friends) v Chief Constable of Wiltshire Police [2025] EWCA Civ 13 comprised two appeals in the Court of Appeal (Civil Division). Each claim examined whether the police could be liable in damages for not preventing injury inflicted by a third party offender. The appeals were heard together. The Court of Appeal rejected the claims of CJ and others alleging a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and negligence. The police appeal in Ms Woodcock’s case succeeded. There...

At Southwark Crown Court, the SFO intends to tell a judge that the US$7.7m taken from a former Petrobras executive is tied to the vast corruption affair that swept through Brazil. Mario Ildeu de Miranda, the ex-oil and gas executive, maintains the funds in his accounts derive from lawful earnings after he left Petrobras in 2003, when he set up as an oil and gas adviser. This matter marks the first appeal by the subject of an SFO account forfeiture order, placing the agency’s civil recovery toolkit under scrutiny. According to Nick Barnard, a partner at Corker Binning LLP, the SFO brings fewer cases of this sort because its caseload often features major probes centred on corporates, yet situations like this demonstrate a readiness to use these powers when appropriate. In recent years, the SFO has been successful in reclaiming criminal proceeds. The agency has obtained its first unexplained wealth order against the former wife of a convicted solicitor, and has chased illicit gains (including donations to schools)...

In this issue: Residential property Insurance Transferring property Property in Scotland LexTalk®Property: a Lexis®Nexis community Additional property updates this week Daily and weekly news alerts Trackers New Q&As Residential property Undue influence—test in ‘hybrid’ cases In One Savings Bank Plc v Waller-Edwards [2024] EWCA Civ 302, the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, rejected the defendant’s appeal to resist the bank’s possession claim. She maintained the lender should have been alerted to undue influence when she and her former partner obtained a loan partly for their mutual non-commercial aims and partly for the partner’s benefit alone. The defendant suggested the proper test was that a lender is put on inquiry unless the aspect conferring a sole benefit on one borrower is insignificant. The Court concluded that test was incorrect, and that Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (Etridge) governs, to be applied to the facts as found by the trial judge. Etridge did not stipulate...

Total intestacy A total intestacy arises where none of the deceased’s estate is effectively disposed of because: no Will was made a Will was made but is invalid the Will was revoked the Will includes no disposition of the estate the Will, though valid, is ineffective, for example where the sole beneficiary died before the deceased Intestacy rules applicable on total intestacy If the deceased died intestate, Parts III and IV of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 (AEA 1925) govern: all movable property of an intestate domiciled in England and Wales, wherever that property is located all immovable property situated in England or Wales, regardless of the deceased’s domicile The intestacy provisions apply to the residuary estate not otherwise disposed of, meaning what remains once all debts are settled and any valid legacies carried out. They operate only over property that could have been the subject of a Will had...

IHT—residence nil rate band Q&As This Practice Note is designed to direct practitioners to Q&As and worked examples explaining the rules by which the inheritance tax (IHT) residence nil rate band (RNRB)—also called the additional threshold—and the transferable RNRB (brought-forward allowance) are worked out and applied on deaths occurring on or after 6 April 2017. For an overview of the RNRB, see Practice Note: IHT—residence nil rate band. Note that while new Q&As are added as they arise, individual Q&As are not updated and reflect the law as at the date shown in each instance. In particular, Q&As dated before 6 April 2025 are likely to discuss the domicile-based IHT regime, rather than the residence-based regime in force from that date. For details on the basic nil rate band (NRB) and the transferable NRB, and especially how to claim these reliefs and the key deadlines, see Practice Notes: IHT—nil rate band (NRB) and transferable NRB and IHT—calculation of nil rate band and transferable NRB. Identifying the qualifying residential...

FORTHCOMING DEVELOPMENTS: On 4 December 2023, former Conservative Home Secretary James Cleverly MP set out a comprehensive package of steps aimed at cutting lawful migration to the UK. Among them, for 'five-year route' Appendix FM cases, was an uplift to the standard minimum income requirement for initial applications, increasing from £18,600 to £29,000 in Spring 2024. That adjustment was implemented through amendments to the Immigration Rules, from 11 April 2024. Two further increases were anticipated in time, however the new Labour Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper MP, instructed the Migration Advisory Committee to scrutinise these financial thresholds. Its report has been issued in the public domain and the updated financial requirement will be confirmed later in 2025. For more detailed information and context, see Practice Note: Immigration calendar...

Instructions: please read all of this before filling in the form Throughout this form, when we refer to: the ‘child’, we mean the child (including an unborn child) for whom you intend to take shared parental leave/pay; and the ‘Mother’, we mean that child’s mother or expectant mother. To take shared parental leave and/or claim shared parental pay, you must be: the child’s father; and/or married to the Mother; or the Mother’s civil partner; or the Mother’s ‘partner’. In this form, ‘partner’ means someone who lives with the Mother and will live with the child in an ‘enduring family relationship’, but is not the Mother’s child, parent (including adoptive or former adoptive parents), grandchild, grandparent, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister, aunt, uncle, niece or nephew. Provided you fall into one or more of the categories above, every reference in this form to the ‘Father or Partner’ is a reference to you...

This overview offers general guidance on injunctions in the family courts to protect against domestic abuse. Your family lawyer can provide specific advice tailored to your situation. Family homes and domestic abuse If you are facing violence, threats or intimidation, you can apply to the family courts for an injunction to help protect you. There are two types of injunction: a non-molestation order, and an occupation order What is a non-molestation order? A non-molestation order restrains your partner or spouse from using or threatening violence against you or your children, or from intimidating, harassing or pestering you. It can include detailed provisions tailored to the particular behaviour affecting you. Who can apply? To seek a non-molestation order you must be an associated person, as defined in the relevant legislation. This includes current and former spouses, civil partners and cohabitants, as well as fiancé(e)s, relatives, people living in the same household, the parents of children in the home, and...

Instructions: please read all of this before filling in the form This form should be completed by you if you are an adopter, or a prospective adopter, employed by the Company who intends to: take shared parental leave and/or apply for shared parental pay; and/or authorise the use of shared parental leave and/or the claiming of shared parental pay by a person (referred to below as the ‘Adopter’s Partner’) who is your spouse, your civil partner, or your ‘partner’. A ‘partner’ is someone who lives with you and will live with the child in an enduring family relationship, but is not your child, parent, adoptive parent, former adoptive parent, grandchild, grandparent, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister, aunt, uncle, niece or nephew. If you are, or will be, entitled to statutory adoption leave in your employment with the Company, you must end that entitlement before you can take shared parental leave. In addition, you must either curtail your statutory adoption leave early, or set...