Loss and expense meaning

This Checklist This Checklist helps pinpoint typical recoverable historic financial outgoings and losses (special damages or historic pecuniary losses) arising before trial. It also aids in collating suitable evidence and highlights the questions that commonly emerge when valuing these losses, setting out recurring issues for consideration as appropriate in practice. For additional guidance, see: Past expenses and losses—overview...

Select here to download a PDF edition...

I’m ready to rewrite your content as requested. Please paste the original text between the START and END tags, including any subheading title, and I’ll deliver a UK English version with the same message, tone, and length, using fresh phrasing and suitable HTML structure...

ARCHIVED: This flowchart is archived and no longer maintained. Please click here to download a PDF file...

Law firms say investment advisers at financial institutions will tread carefully before backing exposure to digitalised funds under the FCA’s tokenisation framework, as they could be liable for any missteps. Yet lawyers warn that the real escalation in consumer risk sits within targeted support. This FCA model permits advisers to steer groups of comparable customers towards products, without the expense and hazards of full advice. The regulator has clarified that firms offering targeted support must only secure better results, which falls short of guaranteeing good outcomes under the Consumer Duty. Lawyers stress the nuance matters for both firms and customers alike today. That distinction may prompt businesses, via targeted support, to funnel clients into digital funds transacting on distributed ledger technology (DLT) systems. Harming consumers Michelle Quinn, a partner at Grosvenor Law, cautioned that setting the bar at better, rather than unequivocally good, outcomes risks spurring advisers to push any option that could materially lift returns and access, notably newer solutions such as digitalised funds. She added that,...

The Consultation advances the reforms to the compulsory purchase order (CPO) regime and compensation framework brought in by the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 (LURA 2023), to honour the Labour government’s manifesto promise to amend compulsory purchase compensation rules ‘to improve land assembly, speed up site delivery, and deliver housing, infrastructure, amenity, and transport benefits in the public interest’, see News Analysis: What the planning industry can expect from the new Labour government. Its intention is that, for defined types of development schemes, landowners receive what the government regards as ‘fair’ compensation, rather than amounts it considers inflated by the prospect of planning permission. Additional proposals aim to accelerate the process and cut the administrative load and expense of implementing CPOs... Changes to the power to limit hope value The first strand of the Consultation builds on LURA 2023, s 190, which amends the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 and the Land Compensation Act 1961 to enable directions to be included in certain CPOs removing the value attributed...

In this issue: Building safety Contract law Bonds Environmental issues Construction industry news LexTalk®Construction: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building safety MHCLG updates guidance on amendments to BSA 2022 introduced by LFRA 2024 MHCLG has refreshed its guidance on the BSA 2022 amendments made by LFRA 2024. The update brings in three measures, taking effect from 31 October 2024, addressing remediation orders, remediation contribution orders, and clarification of ‘relevant steps’. See: LNB News 01/11/2024 42. NAO publishes report on MHCLG’s dangerous cladding remediation portfolio The National Audit Office (NAO) has released a report reviewing MHCLG’s portfolio for remediating dangerous cladding. It evaluates whether remediation in England has been delivered promptly and at a reasonable cost to taxpayers. The report also considers how effectively unsafe buildings are identified and fixed, the expected trajectory of remediation, and the adequacy of MHCLG’s management of taxpayers’ exposure...

Where a company disposes of an intangible fixed asset (IFA) that falls within the corporate intangible assets regime in Part 8 of the Corporation Tax Act 2009 (CTA 2009), any gain or loss arising is recognised for corporation tax as, as appropriate, a credit or a debit. Amounts brought in under CTA 2009, Pt 8 are dealt with as income items, both for charge and relief. Consequently, the usual income/capital divide under general tax law is disapplied. Instead, a credit or debit on the realisation of an IFA is treated either (i) as a receipt or expense of a trade or of a property business, or (ii) where the IFA is not held for the purposes of a trade or property business, as a non-trading credit or a non-trading debit. For further detail on the taxation of IFAs, refer to Practice Note: How intangible fixed assets are taxed—basic principles...

Companies subject to corporation tax may set qualifying charitable donations (QCDs) against total profits once all other reliefs have been claimed, except group relief and group relief for carried‑forward losses, allowing profits to be reduced to nil. Any surplus QCDs lapse unless the company has an investment business. Investment businesses may deduct management expenses from total profits, and this deduction must be taken before any other deductions from total profits. Unused management expenses can be carried forward to the next accounting period and set against that period’s total profits or, for losses arising on or after 1 April 2017, surrendered for group relief. Where there are excess QCDs, they can be carried forward as management expenses, but cannot be surrendered for group relief for carried‑forward losses. For accounting periods beginning on or after 1 April 2024, donations to non‑UK charities do not attract relief. Relief for qualifying charitable donations When a company makes a QCD in an accounting period, it...

This Practice Note explores an adjudicator’s jurisdiction/authority, including how it comes about, whether an adjudicator can issue a binding ruling on their own jurisdiction, and the effect (if any) of mistakes of fact, errors of law or procedural irregularities on that jurisdiction. For guidance on contesting an adjudicator’s jurisdiction, see Practice Notes: Grounds for a jurisdictional challenge in an adjudication and Making a jurisdictional challenge in an adjudication. What is the adjudicator’s jurisdiction? The adjudicator’s jurisdiction (or authority) is, at its core, the power to decide matters concerning the parties’ rights. The adjudicator’s authority derives from: the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA 1996) the contract between the parties, and/or the applicable adjudication rules, such as the Scheme for Construction Contracts ‘Adjudicator’s jurisdiction’ is also used to describe the scope of what they may determine, namely the dispute set out in the Notice of Adjudication. For example, an adjudicator lacks jurisdiction to decide that the employer must...

Variations can also push back the completion date, and may give the Claimant a right to extra time and to prolongation costs. These elements of a variation claim are commonly pursued separately, as an extension of time claim and a prolongation costs claim. By way of illustration, the principal JCT forms provide distinct procedures: one for pricing the changed work, and another for evaluating loss and expense arising from the variation’s effect on the progress of the works (see Practice Note: JCT contracts—variations — Valuing variations under JCT contracts). Accordingly, Claimants should take care not to ‘double dip’ across the separate elements of the claims. No. Description of Variation Claimant’s case Defendant’s response Judge/Tribunal comments The Claimant intended to adopt slab foundations for block A, as depicted on the Claimant’s drawing reference XX dated XX. By email dated XX, the Defendant directed the use of piled foundations for block A...

The Contract comprises the completed Standard Building Contract With Approximate Quantities 2016 published by the JCT subject to the following amendments: This Contract adopts JCT SBC/AQ 2016 with extensive modifications to reflect design responsibility, building safety and commercial controls. Recitals: Contractor to provide a master programme and Schedule of Information Requirements; confirms site due diligence and accepts full CDP design liability. Articles: Dutyholder Regulations added; Tender Price covers Principal Contractor duties; arbitration removed; Schedule of Amendments prevails; strict protection of Third Party Agreements. Definitions/governance: new and revised terms (Building Safety Regulator, HRB, Practical Completion, Copyright Material, Design Sub‑contractors, Dutyholder Regulations); several deletions; English court jurisdiction. Design/materials/information: skill‑and‑care design and coordination; only new, compliant, non‑deleterious materials; golden thread storage; monthly programme reporting; site risks at Contractor’s risk. Procedures/controls: tighter instruction, testing, defects and as‑built duties; enhanced confidentiality and IP licences; HRB assistance; CDM/Dutyholder competency confirmations. Sub‑contracting/rights: prescribed sub‑contracts, insurances and delivery of collateral warranties/third‑party rights; limits on assignment. Payment/commercial: 28‑day final...

Concurrent delay We wish to engage with you on the method to be applied to extensions of time for concurrent delays, a relief that [ insert name of the Contractor appointed on the project ] (the ‘ Contractor ’) has asserted should be available under [ insert name/description of the project ]. By concurrent delay we mean a circumstance where a construction scheme faces critical slippage and two or more separate causes exist, any one of which would, in isolation, have produced the same delay on its own within the project...

What is a DCFA? Most practitioners know the ‘pure’ CFA, commonly referred to as a ‘no win, no fee’ agreement. Working under a pure CFA, the lawyer or legal representative is remunerated only upon a win, as the CFA expressly defines it. If that outcome is not achieved, no fee is payable for the professional work undertaken on the matter. For additional detail, see the subtopic: CFAs and DBAs for further information. A DCFA is often described as a ‘no win, lower fee’ arrangement in contrast to the pure CFA. Under a DCFA, the client agrees to meet the lawyer’s fees in full on success; if the case fails, a reduced fee is payable to the representative. The role of success fees Success fees exist to ensure a solicitor’s portfolio of CFA-backed litigation can operate at nil net loss overall. Put differently, the success uplifts on winning matters are designed to meet the base costs that cannot be recovered on losing matters within that portfolio...