Warrant meaning

During a criminal inquiry, HMRC may apply to a magistrate for a warrant authorising entry to and search of premises. It may also seize and retain any material specified in the warrant. The extent of HMRC’s powers to investigate criminal offences, and the situations in which they may be exercised, is outlined in Practice Note: HMRC criminal investigations and dawn raids. This Checklist offers a practical set of dos and don’ts for a dawn raid. It can act as a handy reference for clients who might face a dawn raid. The procedures described should be communicated to staff in advance. As the client will not know about the raid before it happens, this may be problematic. It may be possible to circulate the guide on a ‘just in case’ basis. It is also sensible to train key staff on how to manage and respond to a dawn raid. What to expect in a dawn raid In a tax context, a dawn raid means a visit from HMRC...

This Checklist sets out the principal questions practitioners should consider when advising a client facing a request for extradition. For a step-by-step overview under the EA 2003, see Practice Note: Extradition under Parts 1 and 2 of the Extradition Act 2003—procedure, together with Extradition from the UK (cat 1 request)—checklist and Extradition from the UK (cat 2 request)—checklist. Read this Checklist alongside Practice Note: Extradition and the statutory framework—an introduction to extradition, which outlines the UK extradition framework and the effect of Brexit on extradition between the UK and EU member states. Principles determining extradition under the Extradition Act 2003 The initial points to assess for a client subject to an extradition request are: does your client fall within Category 1—is this an arrest warrant issued under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement 2020 (TCA 2020) or a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) issued before IP completion day? See Practice Note: Extradition and the statutory framework—an introduction to extradition) does your client fall within Category 2—is...

Prepared in partnership with 4 Pump Court. This checklist sets out the principal issues you need to consider upon receiving an adjudicator’s decision. The main issues At the very outset, there are three principal points that warrant attention: are there any mistakes in the decision that could be corrected under the slip rule? is the outcome capable of enforcement? is the outcome acceptable, or is a final determination required and, if so, can this be pursued through Part 8 proceedings? Enforceability Issues It is important to assess whether the decision is enforceable, or whether it may properly be challenged. Please note that the grounds for challenging an adjudicator’s decision are limited—see Practice Note: Resisting enforcement of an adjudication decision...

ARCHIVED: 11 pm (GMT) on 31 December 2020 signalled the conclusion of the Brexit transition/implementation phase that followed the UK’s exit from the EU. At that moment in time (known in UK legislation as ‘IP completion day’), the principal transitional provisions finally ceased. From IP completion day, the UK is unable to take an active role in the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), as EAWs apply solely to Member States...

PMJC SAS v [W] [X], [M] [X], [X] Créative SAS Case C‑168/24 What are the practical implications of this case? If the Court of Justice adopts the Advocate General’s view, the principal practical effects for proprietors of patronymic trade marks and for designers are set out below: Use of patronymic trade marks Holders of patronymic trade marks matching an initial fashion designer’s name should proceed with care, ensuring their use does not mislead consumers into thinking the goods are linked to that original designer when they are not. For example: a campaign featuring the original designer could cause consumers to wrongly believe the designer took charge of the artistic supervision of the goods. This may amount to conduct justifying revocation for misleading use of the trade marks in issue marketing materials and communications should avoid statements implying the goods were designed in partnership with the initial designer where that is not so, and decorations or features which are indicative of...

Rangecourt SA (formerly Banque Havilland SA) & others v The Financial Conduct Authority Rangecourt SA (formerly Banque Havilland SA) and others v The Financial Conduct Authority and another [2026] UKUT 47 (TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? The judgment delivers notable regulatory guidance on when co-operation will be treated as a mitigating factor in enforcement, and resists the FCA’s increasingly tight interpretation of what is ‘exceptional’. The Tribunal placed marked emphasis on post-breach conduct, particularly where a firm proactively uncovers, scrutinises and reports misconduct. It confirms that firms which promptly self-report, investigate effectively, engage external advisers and put remedial measures in place (including staffing changes) can anticipate substantive mitigation—promoting earlier internal inquiries, greater candour and swifter regulatory dialogue. The Tribunal also sets out a more precise test for co-operation: the decisive question is whether the firm’s actions substantially assisted the regulator, rather than satisfying an elevated, exceptional threshold. The FCA’s Decision Note advanced a narrow view, asserting that the Bank’s provision of the Project Gulf report...

Taiwo v Homelets of Bath Ltd [2025] EWHC 3173 (KB) What are the practical implications of this case? For the purposes of CJCA 2015, s 57, a claim seeking damages for anxiety stemming from harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 is to be treated as a personal injury claim. Consequently, where such a claim is held to be fundamentally dishonest, it must be dismissed unless the court is persuaded that dismissal would lead to substantial injustice. Where fundamental dishonesty is established, the court may: dismiss the whole claim, including components to which no dishonesty is attributed award indemnity costs disapply QOCS protection in respect of enforcement make adverse costs orders for hopeless or abusive appeal conduct The judgment also underlines that persisting with meritless grounds of appeal, particularly in an undisciplined fashion involving repeated applications and iterative documents, can warrant both adverse costs orders and the imposition of a civil restraint order. Finally, lawyers who provide...

Successive UK governments have aimed to cement the UK as one of the world’s most appealing settings for innovation and enterprise. To that end, a wide-ranging suite of tax incentives has been rolled out to encourage innovative companies, supporting both investors and trading entities, and assisting businesses at every phase of a business’s life cycle. These incentives include: R&D tax reliefs patent box business asset disposal relief (previously entrepreneurs’ relief) capital allowances for purchases of: knowhow patents, and plant and machinery venture capital trusts the enterprise investment scheme, and the seed enterprise investment scheme This Practice Note outlines the UK position on key tax considerations when determining how to structure an innovative business with international or global aspirations. The observations are general in nature and work on the basis of a clean slate; revisiting an existing IP ownership arrangement will inevitably demand a bespoke solution (notably...

This Practice Note sets out how to seek an order to retain items taken during a search, under section 59(5) of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (CJPA 2001) and the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, and the grounds for bringing such an application. It also outlines how an opposing party may contest the application and resist the order. For guidance on lawful seizure routes—whether under warrant, under PACE 1984 and CJPA 2001, or with the owner’s consent—and on the procedure for seeking a warrant, see Practice Notes: Seizure and retention of property and Obtaining and executing a search warrant under PACE 1984. For material on search and seizure warrants under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002), consult Practice Note: Search and seizure warrants under section 352 of POCA 2002. When can an application to retain seized property be made? A request for an order permitting retention of seized property—taken in purported exercise of a relevant seizure power (eg under a...

There are several routes, both uncontested and contested, to remove a personal representative; below is an outline of each method. Renunciation An executor can disclaim the right to apply for a grant of probate by a signed, witnessed written renunciation filed at the probate registry (see Practice Note: Removal, renunciation and retirement of personal representatives). Renunciation is barred where the executor has already intermeddled with the estate (see Practice Note: Intermeddling in an estate). By contrast, an administrator need not make any statement about intermeddling. A template for administrators’ renunciation appears in Form PA16. If an executor declines to renounce or to extract probate at that stage, the proving executors may obtain probate with power reserved to that executor instead (see Practice Note: The type of grant needed). Passing over–section 116 Senior Courts Act 1981 Under section 116 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981), the court can, in special circumstances, if necessary or expedient, pass over the person otherwise entitled to the grant—even one...

Precedent Dawn raid Flowchart During any dawn raid, investigators must be continuously accompanied and observed (shadowed). This function is crucial, and shadowers need a clear understanding of their duties. The Precedent Dawn raid Flowchart steers shadowers step by step in managing a dawn raid from start to finish...

1. Immediate response Your initial priorities are to reach your legal counsel, get to the site, and pull together your Dawn Raid Response Team. Actions Contact the organisation’s legal adviser, whether in-house or external, and ensure a solicitor is physically present throughout the raid and any interviews. If you are not already on-site, attend the premises immediately and engage with the investigators. Seek clarity on what the investigators are seeking—ask to view the warrant or decision notice, or any other written documentation demonstrating their authority. Identify whether any other premises are being raided at the same time. Verify the investigators’ authority and take a photocopy of their ID. Contact and convene the Response Team. 2. Preliminary assessment You may feel inclined to alert affected individuals straight away, but you need more detail before deciding if that is necessary or sensible. Your immediate aim is to establish the precise reason and scope of the raid, and the...

These current consolidated terms were published on [ insert date ]. For previous versions, see [ insert URL ]. Please read these terms carefully before proceeding and before you continue. By [ clicking ‘Accept’ on the associated order form ] you confirm agreement to the terms set out on this webpage (our Agreement) on behalf of the person or organisation [ e.g. identified as the ‘customer’ in the associated order form ] (the Customer), thereby creating a legally binding contract with [ insert legal name ], a company incorporated in England and Wales whose registered number is [ insert company number ] and whose registered office is at [ insert registered office ] (the Supplier). By [ clicking ‘Accept’ ] you further affirm and warrant that you hold the requisite capacity and authority to enter into our Agreement for and on behalf of the Customer as a legally enforceable and binding contract with the Supplier in all applicable jurisdictions. If you lack such capacity or authority, or do not...

It is assumed for the purposes of this Q&A that the refusal of consent concerns an alienation application (ie a proposal to assign/underlet/charge/part with possession). If, however, the matter instead relates to alterations, the position will need to be reconsidered, as distinct case law and statutory provisions govern that topic. As a useful starting point for that subject, see: Alterations and improvements for property disputes lawyers—overview. Unreasonable withholding of consent As set out in Practice Note: Landlord's consent to assign or underlet, the High Court in Ansa Logistics v Towerbeg confirmed that consent to assign/underlet cannot normally be withheld merely because a landlord is able to point to a breach of covenant. The key question is whether the particular breach is of such a character or seriousness as to warrant the refusal of consent...