Showing meaning

The impact bankruptcy and divorce proceedings have on one another How bankruptcy intersects with divorce has been examined in a raft of decisions in both the bankruptcy jurisdiction and the family courts. Regrettably, it is far from rare for a bankruptcy to be underway whilst a divorce is progressing, and running the two together can produce clashes over how assets are apportioned. Such concurrent proceedings often bring the division of property into sharp focus, as priorities compete. The family court, for its part, aims to make a property adjustment order, assessing, among other factors, the future needs of the spouses and any children; by contrast, the bankruptcy court divides the assets with creditors’ interests placed foremost in the decision-making. This possible tension must be weighed with care, and, in practice, the key issue is timing: when the bankruptcy was commenced compared with the date a property adjustment order was made. This checklist and timeline outlines the effect each step in bankruptcy can have on ancillary relief proceedings within a...

This checklist outlines practical matters to bear in mind when managing an application for alternative service where service must occur outside England and Wales. Checklist Consideration References If you seek alternative service because permitted routes, including the Hague Convention, are likely to be lengthy and drawn out, the application ought to be buttressed by the following: a formal confirmation from the Foreign Process Office describing and confirming the likely time delays for effecting service in the relevant country; detailed evidence, preferably from a locally-qualified lawyer, showing how long service ordinarily takes via standard channels, with reference to specific experience or examples where relevant; if significant delay in that jurisdiction is notorious, exhibit independent corroborative evidence to support that position. Practice Note: Alternative service—making an application—Evidence in support The courts will consider any material indicating that a defendant is attempting to evade or impede service. A claimant should carefully record and preserve such behaviour, as doing so will strengthen the...

Considerations for trustees and managers Confirm the scheme is updated to meet the statutory ban on age discrimination, considering carve‑outs in the Age Exceptions Order, SI 2010/2133. If not already updated, assess whether changes are needed, again having regard to those exceptions. Where a length‑of‑service test disadvantages members with over 5 years’ service, set procedures to obtain the employer’s confirmation that it reasonably appears to serve a business need. Note some exceptions require a rule, practice, action or decision to pursue a specified aim, or allow it only to a defined extent; keep material showing it targets that aim or is limited accordingly. Carefully consider whether proposed alterations to governing or operating rules, practices, actions or decisions would amount to age discrimination. Considerations for employers For occupational and personal schemes, factor in age discrimination and the scope of exceptions when seeking any changes to rules, practices, actions or decisions. Where a length‑of‑service criterion disadvantages a member,...

Thiel-Czerwinke and another (joint liquidators of Courtside Recycling Ltd) v Crabb [2024] EWHC 337 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling underlines the uncompromising obligation on directors to maintain trading records, and accepts that discarding or failing to retain them was, on these facts, a constituent part of the director’s fraudulent design. It also clarifies that once office-holders demonstrate that company assets or cash were transferred to a director, the absence of documents showing that the funds or property were applied for the company’s advantage renders the director liable to repay the whole amount to the company. That outcome applies even though the judge did not doubt that Mr Crabb did in fact use some of the cash when making payments for Courtside... What was the background? Mr Crabb served as the Company’s sole director; the business dealt in scrap metal. For the trading periods from August 2014 to February 2018, the Company submitted VAT returns declaring sales, net of VAT, totalling...

In this issue: Corporate governance Environmental, social and governance issues Directors Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Corporate governance FRC publishes report to support transition to UK Stewardship Code 2026 The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) has issued ‘Preparing for the UK Stewardship Code 2026: Applying insights from current reporting’ to support signatories as they move to the refreshed Code, which comes into force on 1 January 2026. The publication offers pragmatic guidance and examples of high-quality disclosures to help asset owners, asset managers and service providers align with the Code’s simplified reporting framework. Under the 2026 Code, a dual reporting approach applies: a Policy and Context Disclosure must be lodged every four years, complemented by an annual Activities and Outcomes Report showing how the Principles are put into practice. The FRC’s paper also explores areas including engagement disclosures, the selection and oversight of external managers,...

Tribunal chair Andrew Lenon KC stated the claimants have a credible chance of showing that Apple’s alleged excessive commissions charged to UK-based app developers for transactions completed on non‑UK storefronts constituted conduct carried out in the UK. In January 2024, Apple sought to have the tribunal strike out the action, which is brought on behalf of more than 1,500 UK‑based app developers over purportedly unfair App Store fees. The company contended that the majority of developers lack a UK claim because most distribution charges arose from purchases made in other countries, relating to the placement and sale of apps. The tech giant’s legal team further submitted that the lawsuit, spearheaded by Norwich Business School professor Sean Ennis, attempts to impose English competition law on charges incurred overseas and on commerce taking place outside the UK...

ARCHIVED : This archived Practice Note offers context on the key distinctions between the SIP guidance in ESSUM and the places it can now be located within ETASSUM. It also sets out any material differences in the guidance. This Practice Note reflects the position as at December 2015 and is intended solely for background reference. Background On 28 October 2015, HMRC announced a new Employee Tax Advantaged Share Scheme User Manual (ETASSUM), which is available on its Gov.uk website. At the time of writing, the earlier guidance in ESSUM remains live and can still be accessed. As its name suggests, ETASSUM covers enterprise management incentives (EMI) schemes, company share option plans (CSOPs), save as you earn (SAYE) schemes and share incentive plans (SIPs). ETASSUM is not yet in its final form and, at the time of preparing this Practice Note, certain links are still missing. Each page contains a feedback link that can be used to alert HMRC to any problems. The table below presents a summary...

Introduction This Practice Note is part of our LLB Contract Law suite, aimed at students. In contract law, a vitiating factor is something that damages the legal validity of the consent needed for a binding agreement. One such factor is misrepresentation, where one party makes a false statement to another. This Practice Note outlines misrepresentation in English contract law, showing how inaccurate pre-contract statements undermine real consent and render contracts voidable rather than void. It sets out the elements of an actionable claim (a false statement of fact or law, inducement and attribution), separates fraudulent, negligent and innocent misrepresentation, and reviews the key cases alongside the Misrepresentation Act 1967. Particular emphasis is placed on remedies, especially rescission and damages, and on the equitable bars to rescission (affirmation, lapse of time, impossibility of restitution, third-party rights and judicial discretion). Throughout, it brings together judicial reasoning, policy considerations and exam-focused guidance, illustrating how modern case law balances fairness to the misled party with certainty in commercial transactions. Overview Definition and...

Defending a claim of copyright infringement In most copyright infringement cases, a defendant will first challenge the claimant’s position on copyright itself, contending either that no copyright exists in the work identified, or that any subsisting copyright is not owned by the claimant (and sometimes both). The next step is often to assert that, even assuming copyright does subsist, there has been no infringement. This may include arguing that the original work and the accused material lack sufficient similarity, or adducing evidence that the disputed work was created independently, i.e. that no copying occurred. Finally, there are specific statutory carve-outs to infringement, predominantly set out in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988). These are referred to as permitted acts. The range of permitted acts applying to copyright is extensive, with several also relevant to database right. Where other legal claims arise, such as breach of confidence, the permitted acts defence will not cover those causes of action. Permitted acts can be invoked in relation to...

A balance sheet provides a simple picture of the company’s financial position at any point in time, essentially showing what the business is worth...

A. Additional documents for main applicant Provide proof of ongoing employment and that you can financially support yourself and any dependants in the UK. Submit payslips and bank statements for a three‑month or 12‑month span (see comment), showing a full pay breakdown, including salary and any commission, and evidence of your financial self‑sufficiency. The most recent item must be dated within 31 days of the application. Payslips: either on company headed paper naming your employer, or printouts of online payslips. Personal bank or building society statements: either on bank stationery; ad hoc statements on the bank’s letterhead (not mini‑statements from Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs)); or printouts of electronic statements. All statements must include: your name account number statement date the financial institution’s name, contact details, and a branch code all transactions for the period Also provide proof of UK accommodation, for example a tenancy agreement or mortgage papers. Document formats may vary...

Purpose of performance appraisal and personal development Our appraisal and development approach aims to: build a highly focused, effective and motivated team by supporting and valuing every person in the firm make sure everyone understands the firm’s strategic aims and how they can individually help deliver them Rating system It is important to understand the appraisal ratings: Exceeded all expectations — Consistently surpasses objectives, core skills and values; is seen as a role model or go‑to colleague, showing the critical success factors valued by the firm. Exceeded some expectations — Reliably meets and often surpasses objectives, core skills and values; exceeds certain key elements, though not all. Met all expectations — Fully meets, and at times exceeds, key expectations on objectives, core skills and values; performs successfully across the role; needs only moderate supervision and guidance, as appropriate for this level. Some, but not all expectations met — Meets elements of the key objectives, performance...

For this Q&A, we proceed on the basis that the easements are recorded on the title... Prescription Act 1832 The Prescription Act 1832 (PA 1832) sets out a statutory route for acquiring easements by prescription, operating in parallel with common law prescription and the doctrine of lost modern grant. The statutory framework can be outlined as follows: Easements other than rights of light: continuous, uninterrupted enjoyment for 40 years establishes a claim that is indefeasible save by express consent. Enjoyment for 20 years creates a claim that cannot be defeated by showing the right could not have existed since 1180, though it may still be overcome by any other available defences...