Payee meaning

The Payment Systems Regulator’s plan to lower the reimbursement ceiling from £415,000 to £85,000 for authorised push payment fraud, taking effect on 7 October 2024, risks spurring offenders to split scams into numerous sham transfers to maximise compensation claims. Authorised push payment, or APP, fraud arises when consumers are duped into sending funds to criminals, and it has already proved stubbornly resistant. Money lost to this fraud reached almost £460m in the year to December 2023, according to the trade body UK Finance. Daren Allen, a partner at Shoosmiths LLP, cautioned that, even at the reduced level, the reimbursement framework could introduce a fresh hazard, with the scheme as designed open to exploitation by organised crime. Criminal schemes A payer might in fact be part of the plot, sending money to a willing payee purely to trigger mandatory repayments from the banks involved. The aim would be to secure compensation from the institutions concerned. Similar collusion may already have been used to benefit from the voluntary APP refunds...

Y v Z [2024] EWFC 4 What are the practical implications of this case? Before determining the application, the court was taken through a series of authorities. Peel J concluded that those decisions do not reveal a standard tariff or an upper limit; instead, each application falls to be decided on its own facts and within its specific context, with context being decisive... ChA 1989, Sch 1 empowers the court to order a settlement of property, commonly structured as a trust, licence or lease. Such arrangements preserve the payer’s ownership of the asset, whilst permitting the payee to live in the property with the children during their minority, or until the conclusion of tertiary education, as explained in Re A (A Child: Financial Provision) [2014] EWCA Civ 1577, [2015] 2 FLR 625 and UD v DN (Schedule 1, Children Act 1989; Capital Provision) [2021] EWCA Civ 1947, [2022] 2 FLR 308... In addition, the court may direct the payment of a lump sum or a series...

In this issue: Competition and state aid Corporate Data protection and cybersecurity Free movement, employment and immigration Financial services Insurance and reinsurance IP Life sciences Regulatory TMT International trade Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Trackers and horizon scanners Competition and state aid State aid—Commission reviews State aid rules for banks in difficulty The European Commission has launched a call for evidence to update the State aid regime for banks in difficulty. The current framework consists of six distinct communications, last revised in 2013. See News Analysis: EU Competition law—daily round-up (17/03/2026). State aid—Commission adopts new State aid rules to boost the use of more sustainable ways of transport The Commission has approved new State aid Land and Multimodal Transport Guidelines (LMT Guidelines) and a Transport Block Exemption Regulation (TBER), refreshing the EU State aid framework to encourage more sustainable passenger and freight transport,...

The UK’s rules on hybrid and other mismatches Since 1 January 2017, the UK’s hybrid and other mismatch rules (described in this Practice Note as the hybrid rules) have been in force, designed to neutralise tax mismatches arising from how a hybrid instrument or hybrid entity is treated for tax. Although the hybrid rules typically apply to cross-border dealings involving two or more jurisdictions, they can also apply to transactions that are entirely UK domestic. They specifically address: deduction/non-inclusion mismatches (D/NI mismatches), i.e. where a payment under a hybrid mismatch arrangement is deductible in the payer jurisdiction for tax purposes but is not included in the taxable income of a payee or a related party investor; and double deduction cases (DD cases), i.e. where a payment under a hybrid mismatch arrangement gives rise to more than one tax deduction. For more detail on the hybrid rules, see Practice Note: Hybrid mismatches—introduction to the rules. For an overview in table form of...

Background and introduction to SEPA After the euro was introduced in 11 EU countries in 1999, it became evident that domestic and cross-border retail payment services did not deliver comparable service levels. In September 1999, the European Central Bank (ECB) issued a report on enhancing cross-border retail payment services (the ECB 1999 Report). The report recognised that cross-border credit transfers within the euro area lagged significantly behind domestic credit transfers, even though a single currency environment called for a Single European Payment Area (SEPA). To initiate the debate and send a clear signal to the banking and payment systems industry, the Eurosystem (consisting of the ECB and the national central banks of countries that had adopted the euro) set out seven objectives for the industry to meet: Improved systems/services to be in place by 1 January 2002 Place priority on cross-border credit transfers Substantially lower the price of cross-border credit transfers Ensure settlement times are comparable for domestic and cross-border payments As...

This Practice Note examines the EU’s Recast Second Wire Transfer Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 (Recast WTR2) on information accompanying transfers of funds and certain cryptoassets. Often referred to as the Recast Second Funds Transfer Regulation (Recast FTR2), it takes effect on 30 December 2024. Recast WTR2 sits at the heart of the EU’s anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing (CTF) architecture, and underpins the bloc’s oversight of payments and cryptoassets. It revises and supersedes the Second Wire Transfer Regulation (EU) 2015/847 (EU WTR2) to bring EU rules into line with the latest Financial Action Task Force (FATF) standards, the worldwide AML/CTF rule‑setting authority. Under Recast WTR2, the information‑sharing benchmark for transfers—commonly called the ‘Travel Rule’—sets out the payer and payee details that must travel with any funds transfer, regardless of currency, to help prevent, detect and investigate money laundering and terrorist financing (ML/TF), whenever at least one of the payment service providers (PSPs) engaged in the transfer is established in the EU. It further obliges PSPs...

PROMISSORY NOTE Principal sum: £[ insert amount in numerals ] ([ insert amount in words ]) [ insert date ] [ I (the ‘Promisor’), OR We (the ‘Promisors’) jointly, OR We (the ‘Promisors’) jointly and severally ] undertake to pay [ insert name of payee ] of [ insert address of payee ] (the ‘Payee’) [ or to the Payee’s order OR to bearer ] [ on demand OR [ insert number of months ] months after date OR [ insert number of days ] days after sight ], at [ insert address at which this promissory note may be presented ]...

PROMISSORY NOTE Principal sum: £[ enter amount in figures ] ([ enter amount in words ]) [ enter date ] [ enter name of company ], a company registered in England and Wales with registration number [ enter company number ], whose registered office is at [ enter address ], together with [ enter name of company ], a company registered in England and Wales with registration number [ enter company number ], whose registered office is at [ enter address ], (the ‘Promisor [ s ]’), [ jointly and severally ] hereby undertakes [ s ] to pay [ enter name and address of payee ] (the ‘Payee’) [ or to the order of the Payee OR to bearer ] [ on demand OR [ enter number of months ] months after date OR [ enter number of days ] days after sight ], at [ enter address where the promissory note may be presented for sight or payment ]...