Proof meaning

Procedural Guide This Procedural Guide explains the process for seeking an enforcement order under the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) to secure compliance with a child arrangements order (CAO). Such an order may require the respondent to complete unpaid work. It sets out details of the following: Who can apply Pre-action requirements Criminal standard of proof Orders the court may make Restrictions on making an enforcement order The procedure applies where a CAO has a warning notice properly attached and it is alleged the order has been breached, making enforcement necessary. Enforcing contact provisions can be difficult where the parent with whom the child lives is opposed to contact. Under ChA 1989 the court has extended powers to enforce all provisions of CAOs, not just those about contact but also those concerning a child’s living arrangements...

Determine whether a business relationship is being established: Does a business relationship already exist? If so, no checks for discrepancies are at present required Will the firm deliver services to the trustees, eg agreed terms of business? Will the relationship be ongoing rather than a single instruction? ...

Compulsory liquidation Provide a certified court interlocutor ordering winding up and naming the liquidator, plus certified proof of appointment: creditors’ resolution, contributories’ resolution with the liquidator’s certificate on the creditors’ meeting, or a court order. Creditors’ voluntary liquidation Include a certified general meeting winding‑up resolution and either the creditors’ resolution appointing the liquidator or a court order. If moving straight from administration, add a certified, administrator‑signed and Companies House‑stamped form 2.25B (Scotland). Members' voluntary liquidation Supply a liquidator/secretary certificate that a solvency declaration was filed, and a certified general meeting resolution appointing the liquidator. Checking the appointment Irregularities do not invalidate acts, but absence of appointment does—so verify appointment and any limits on Schedule 4 powers; in compulsory cases powers are court‑controlled and creditors or contributories may apply. Joint liquidators Confirm power to act severally; otherwise all must execute sale documents. ...

Practice Note: Contract interpretation—distinguishing between liquidated damages and penalty clauses As highlighted in this Practice Note, working out whether a liquidated damages provision will be struck down as a penalty is seldom straightforward and often demands careful judgment. Although each dispute turns on the court’s construction of the contract, there are several points to weigh when examining the ambit of a supposed liquidated damages term and its potential exposure to a penalty challenge, both in substance and effect. When you are drafting such a clause, it is vital to keep these considerations in view, and to think about how it sits alongside connected provisions, including any related terms that operate with it. See: Drafting and negotiating a liquidated damages clause—checklist Precedent: Liquidated damages clause For targeted analysis of the way authorities have treated provisions in commercial agreements that stipulate ‘default interest’, see the following materials: Penalty interest rates in commercial contracts Contract interpretation—distinguishing between liquidated damages and penalty...

This Flowchart This flowchart outlines a process covering key actions and considerations for carrying out an appropriate level of client due diligence (CDD). Use it as a reference each time you take on a new client or begin a new matter...

A UK accountancy practice’s imminent prosecution for failing to stop tax evasion has thrown a spotlight on the country’s weak track record on enforcement, across this area of compliance, though the proceedings may galvanise a renewed push. Bennett Verby, which operates in northern England, is due to stand trial in September 2027, marking the first corporate case for failing to prevent tax evasion since the offence reached the statute book eight years ago. HMRC, the UK tax authority, has recently charged Bennett Verby with failing to prevent the facilitation of UK tax evasion under section 45 of the Criminal Finances Act 2017. Company representatives appeared before a Manchester court earlier this month. No plea has been entered yet, but the firm will reportedly contest the claims. The failure to prevent tax evasion offence was enacted with fanfare eight years ago, in the wake of the 2016 Panama Papers offshore finance scandal and the preceding Swiss Leaks revelations a year earlier, which alleged that companies had assisted wealthy individuals to avoid...

Christopher Purkiss (as liquidator of Ethos Solutions Limited) v Tim Kennedy and others [2025] EWCA Civ 268 Ethos Solutions Limited (the Company) ran a disguised remuneration arrangement under which sums were channelled to an employee benefit trust (EBT) without withholding income tax or NICs. The EBT’s trustee allocated funds into sub-trusts for the respondents and, when asked, advanced the amounts to them as discretionary loans. On 4 December 2012, HMRC issued determinations, holding the Company liable for income tax and NICs of c.£2m arising from payments made to the EBT in the 2008‑09 and 2009‑10 tax years. On 18 December 2012, the Company entered creditors’ voluntary liquidation, making no remittances to HMRC and taking no steps to appeal. On 9 January 2013, HMRC lodged a proof of debt totalling c.£2m with respect to those same EBT payments, as claimed therein...

The government supported £77bn in total of loans across three relief programmes during 2020 and 2021. Around £47bn went out through the bounce-back loans scheme, with £1.79bn thought to be fraudulent, according to the department’s most recent figures. Lenders marked £5m of the £25.8bn issued under the coronavirus business interruption loan scheme as suspected fraud. No loans made via the third programme—the coronavirus large business interruption loan scheme—have been flagged as potentially fraudulent, the DBT stated. The DBT did not provide an immediate response to a request for additional comment...

Proving the identity of the driver Where the bench is satisfied the defendant was served with a notice under section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, and the court receives a statement from the defendant admitting they were the driver, that statement is accepted as proof of identity. If no such admission exists—either because a RTA 1988, s 172 notice was not properly served in line with the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, Pt 4, or the allegation is not one to which section 172 applies—the magistrates will look to other material. Information provided by the registered keeper to police during interview or questioning Entries held on the police national database See: Creed v Scott [1976] RTR 485 (not reported by LexisNexis®) and DPP v Bayliff [2003] EWHC 539 (Admin) (not reported by LexisNexis®). Details supplied to the police may suffice to prove who was driving; it is immaterial whether a driving licence is produced to confirm name...

The creation of the Competition and Market Authority (CMA) in 2013 The establishment of the Competition and Market Authority (CMA) in 2013 coincided with an overhaul of a component of the criminal cartel offence that prosecutors had to prove to convict directors and officers. When the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (ERRA 2013) commenced on 1 April 2014, the dishonesty element of the cartel offence was scrapped, marking a radical change to what prosecutors had previously been required to establish. Under the revised regime, an individual commits the offence by agreeing, with one or more persons, that two or more undertakings will take part in specified prohibited cartel arrangements (price-fixing, market-sharing, bid-rigging, or limiting output), regardless of dishonesty. Any such arrangements must have occurred in the UK to be caught. As explained further below, this shift is partly offset by new exceptions, covering notification of customers, publication of arrangements, and compliance with a legal requirement, as well as defences, including that the accused did not intend to conceal...

Justification—the ‘justification defence’ This Practice Note explores the concept of justification—often termed the ‘justification defence’—within discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). It addresses what may amount to a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It assesses proportionality in cases of indirect discrimination (EqA 2010, s 19(2)(d)), including where the objective is to prevent discrimination linked to other protected characteristics. It reviews the notion of a provision, criterion or practice (PCP) and considers issues arising in relation to direct and indirect age discrimination (EqA 2010, s 13(2)) and the Heyday case. In doing so, it evaluates objective justification, defence (no discrimination), the burden of proof, the approach a tribunal should adopt, and circumstances where discrimination rights come into conflict. This Practice Note includes references to case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). For guidance on whether judgments of the Court of Justice are binding on UK courts, see Practice Note: Assimilated law—Assimilated case law. Domestic measures enacted to fulfil UK obligations under...

The Contract comprises the completed Standard Building Contract Without Quantities for use in Scotland 2016 published by the SBCC subject to the following amendments: Recitals and Articles updated: contractor to provide a master programme and Schedule of Information Requirements; CDP responsibility accepted; Principal Contractor duties priced; arbitration deleted; Schedule of Amendments prevails; Third Party Agreements duties. Contract Particulars: arbitration entries removed; Rectification Period set at 12 months; fluctuations and certain PII/guarantee entries deleted. Conditions: key definitions revised (Practical Completion, Copyright Material, Design sub‑contractors, Funder, Site); Scottish jurisdiction; approvals mean principles only; entire agreement; variations in writing. Design/materials/programming: contractor accepts ER/CP; quality and non‑deleterious materials; programme reporting; site risk; drawings/info supply; tighter discrepancy notices. Time/defects: mitigate and advise on delay; narrower Relevant Events; Practical Completion clarified; stronger rectification, consequential damage and indemnity; phased as‑built/occupation information. IP/confidentiality/BIM: broader licence, moral rights waivers and delivery; confidentiality reinforced; BIM where adopted. Management/sub‑contracting: access, approved Site Manager, meetings; prescribed sub‑contracts; collateral warranties/third‑party rights; CDM duties; insurance...

This form has been designed to assist you in lodging a data protection complaint so that we can examine and resolve it as swiftly as possible. Completing the form is optional; if you would rather, you may write to us or email your complaint using the contact details in section 5. 1 About you Fill in this section with details of the person submitting the complaint, even if the matter relates to someone else. Your name [ Details to be inserted here ] Your contact details [ Details to be inserted here ] [ Account OR Customer OR Client ] number, if known [ Details to be inserted here ] [ Your identity information ] [ For security reasons, we cannot respond to a complaint until your identity has been verified. Please provide [ insert details of identity information required, e.g. a certified copy of a driving licence or passport, plus a utility bill or other proof of address ] ] ...

A. Documents for main applicant Evidence of the sponsor parent(s)' income and funds: Examples of suitable evidence are set out below. While a six-month span is not mandated by the Immigration Rules, it is recommended as a reasonable timeframe for demonstrating income and savings. Payslips for the previous six months (for employed persons). And/or proof of business or self-employment income for at least the last six months, such as: (a) Letter from a registered accountant for the business confirming the sponsor parent(s)’ income during that period. (b) Invoices. (c) Business accounts. Personal bank or building society statements or passbooks covering the past six months. Any accountant providing a supporting letter must be registered with an appropriate professional regulatory body. Bank or building society statements should show what has been paid in and out of the accounts for the past six months...

Disability discrimination Under section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) and EqA 2010, Sch 1, Pt 1, a diagnosis of cancer is treated, without further proof, as a disability for EqA 2010 purposes. See Practice Note: Disability. Attention must be given to the various forms of discrimination and other banned conduct contained in EqA 2010, as set out within that legislation and provisions therein. See the part of Practice Note: Disability discrimination headed ‘The basic types of discrimination and other prohibited conduct’, together with the fuller Practice Notes cited there and cross-referred within that section. For EqA 2010 purposes, a ‘dismissal’ also covers situations where an employee’s employment ends (and is not immediately renewed on identical terms) because a particular period has run out, or a particular event has happened, or a particular circumstance has arisen; this includes the ending of fixed-term contracts (EqA 2010, s 39(7)–(8)). Accordingly, the requirement to make reasonable adjustments binds employers when they are considering dismissing an employee; that is, dismissal will...

In this Q&A, the title deeds were not received at all, rather than being mislaid or destroyed. Where deeds are absent or have been destroyed, a first registration application must explain the circumstances that led to their loss or destruction. HM Land Registry assesses each matter on its individual merits, but where the evidence does not convincingly establish those events and place the title’s history beyond doubt, it will usually award only a possessory title. For additional guidance, see Practice Note: Deducing title to unregistered land—stamp duty, mortgages, execution of documents, missing title deeds, sales of part and other considerations. First registration of title if deeds have been lost or destroyed Rule 27 of the Land Registration Rules 2003 (LRR 2003), SI 2003/1417, was amended by the Land Registration (Amendment) Rules 2008, SI 2008/1919, Schedule 1, rule 4(1), paragraph 8(1), and recast under the heading: ‘First registration applications based on adverse possession or where title documents are otherwise unavailable’...

With effect from 11 November 2021 No individual may enter a CQC-registered care home unless they can present documentary proof that they have completed a full course of coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination, or formal confirmation that they should not be vaccinated for clinical reasons, except where they are: a resident of the home a friend or family member of a resident visiting a resident who is dying, or offering comfort or support to a bereaved resident required, where reasonably necessary, to provide emergency assistance on the premises attending the premises in the course of their duties as a member of the emergency services carrying out urgent maintenance work within the care home under 18 years of age The 'registered person'—that is, the individual registered with the CQC as the manager or service provider—has responsibility for ensuring that anyone entering a care home is either vaccinated or exempt. These provisions will clearly affect people who enter a care home...