Stopping Up Order meaning

The circumstances in which an incumbent office-holder needs to resign from their appointment are: ill-health retiring as, or stopping practice as, a licensed insolvency practitioner (IP) a conflict of interest, or a shift in personal circumstances, that prevents or renders impracticable the continued performance of duties Examples include curtailment or withdrawal of the IP’s licence to act, the IP changing firm with appointments not transferring, or alternative arrangements being put in place for those appointments. This Checklist should be read alongside the Checklist on the block transfer of office-holder appointments: Procedure for block transfers of office-holder appointments—checklist, as a block transfer order can often be the speediest and most economical means of addressing the situation. Further guidance appears in the Practice Note: Block transfer orders—the law and practice. An office-holder can also be displaced by creditors, which may need to be factored in. For more detail, see: Removal of an office-holder—checklist. While the various insolvency regimes share broadly...

In this issue: Bribery, corruption, sanctions and export controls Environmental offences Financial services and pensions offences Food safety and hygiene offences Fraud, forgery, tax and theft offences Health and safety and corporate manslaughter offences Local authority prosecutions Corporate Crime in Scotland International Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Useful information Bribery, corruption, sanctions and export controls UK sanctions regime review lacks detail on beefing up meagre enforcement Proposals from the UK government to merge sanctions lists and accelerate action on civil-law infringements are likely to be welcomed as objectives, yet the refreshed approach sidesteps the problem of uneven enforcement. The newest review of the sanctions framework gives little clarity on how to make improvements: ministers talk about boosting the deterrent effect of enforcement, but there is no clear reference to additional resources for investigators. See News Analysis: UK sanctions regime review...

In this issue: UK/ EU and international regulators and bodies Regulated activities Authorisation, approval and supervision Prudential requirements Financial crime and sanctions Consumer protection Complaints, compensation and claims management Investigations, enforcement and discipline Regulation of benchmarks and IBOR reform Regulation of capital markets Sustainable finance and ESG Banks and mutuals Investment funds and asset management EU MiFID II Consumer credit, mortgage and home finance Regulation of insurance FSMA regulated pensions activity Payment services and systems Fintech and cryptoassets Regulation of AI in FS Dispute resolution for financial services lawyers LexTalk®Financial Services: a Lexis®Nexis community Financial Services Enforcement Database Intraday news alerts Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Latest Q&As UK/ EU and international regulators and bodies Fourth omnibus simplification package proposes new rules for ‘small mid-caps’ The Commission...

Private actions CAT grants interim injunction requiring Porsche to continue supply of spare parts to Eurospares The CAT has delivered its judgment in Eurospares (Continental Parts) Limited v (1) Porsche Cars Great Britain Limited (2) Porsche Retail Group Limited, following an application by Eurospares (Continental Parts) Ltd (Eurospares) for an interim injunction. Eurospares sought an order restraining Porsche Cars Great Britain Limited (PCGB) and Porsche Retail Group Limited (PRG) (together, Porsche) from stopping or refusing to supply Eurospares with Porsche spare parts pending determination of its claim. That claim alleges that the design of Porsche’s selective distribution system infringes the Chapter I and Chapter II prohibitions in the Competition Act 1998. In response, the CAT granted interim relief, directing Porsche to maintain the supply of Porsche spare parts to Eurospares until the dispute is resolved...

What is a s 257 order? Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) concerns footpaths, bridleways and restricted byways that are impacted by development. It empowers a ‘competent authority’ to permit the stopping up or diversion of these routes where they are satisfied it is required to facilitate development being undertaken either: in line with planning permission issued under TCPA 1990, Pt III or TCPA 1990, s 293A (see: Necessary for development to be carried out below), or by a government department. TCPA 1990, s 257 further enables an order to be made ahead of the grant of planning permission, where the stopping up or diversion would be required if planning permission were granted, with such an order only capable of being confirmed once planning permission has in fact been granted. These powers apply to routes affected by development...

This Practice Note explains the powers, processes and procedures for stopping up and diverting footpaths under sections 118 and 119 of the Highways Act 1980 (HiA 1980). Please note that there are alternative mechanisms for stopping up/extinguishing and re-routing rights of way. For an overview and comparison of the tools available to stop up or divert rights of way, see Practice Note: Powers to stop up and divert highways and footpaths. Stopping up of footpaths, bridleways and restricted byways under HiA 1980, s 118 Section 118 of the HiA 1980 confers a discretion on highway authorities to extinguish a footpath, bridleway or restricted byway where the route is unnecessary for public use. Orders made under section 118 are termed 'public path extinguishment orders'. Although a public path extinguishment order under section 118 must be made by the highway authority, the statute contemplates that such orders may follow an application. The relevant provisions of the HiA 1980 do not identify who may submit that application. Nevertheless, secondary legislation regulating...

Remedies for misuse of private information and breach of confidence This Practice Note concentrates on the relief available where private information has been misused—whether through an actual or threatened publication, or by the manner in which personal information was obtained—and for breaches of confidence involving the disclosure of personal information. The principal forms of relief are damages and injunctions. Because the law in this field embraces a broad spectrum of factual circumstances, courts take a supple, case-sensitive approach to remedies. Thus, in one set of facts, the most effective way to vindicate the claimant’s privacy may be an injunction restraining an anticipated disclosure; in another, the defendant may already have disclosed the material without authority and derived a commercial gain. In that scenario, suitable relief may include compensatory damages or an order for an account of profits, together with an injunction stopping any further dissemination and directions for delivery up or destruction of the private and/or confidential information at issue. Accordingly, remedies are tailored to the circumstances, ensuring privacy...

This Precedent is for the Notice This Notice applies where an Order has been made to permanently extinguish or re-route public rights of way, namely footpaths, bridleways or restricted byways, in order to enable development to proceed for the purposes of permitting development to take place. The Notice is prepared pursuant to section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and paragraph 1 of Schedule 14...

Private rights stand apart from the public rights vis-à-vis the highway. Consequently, the said private rights endure...