Where the judgment of the disciplinary committee stands postponed1, and it appears to the chairman of the committee from information received since the inquiry that the respondent2 has failed to comply with any undertaking given to the committee or that the proceedings should be resumed for any other reason, the chairman may direct that the proceedings be resumed3. Where the committee is to resume the hearing of an inquiry, then not later than 28 days before the day fixed for the resumption of the proceedings, the clerk4 must send to the respondent and the solicitor5 a notice of resumption
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and millions of others like it, sign-in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial.
EXISTING USER? SIGN IN
TAKE A FREE TRIAL
This Practice Note provides an introduction to intercreditor agreements and their key provisions. This Practice Note:•explains the purpose of having an intercreditor agreement and when an intercreditor agreement would be used instead of a deed of priority or subordination deed•provides links to
When is quantum meruit and quantum valebat relevant?Claims in quantum meruit (value of services) and quantum valebat (value of goods) arise in diverse situations ranging from where contractual terms are silent on issues of payment to where there is no contract at all (Serck v Drake & Scull).General
Community order requirementsCommunity order requirements are set out in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003), as amended by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO 2012) and the Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014 (ORA 2014). Criminal Justice Act 2003, s 152(2)
This Practice Note considers the doctrine of forum non conveniens, also referred to as the appropriate forum or the proper place for a dispute to be determined. This doctrine is of relevance when determining whether the courts of England and Wales have jurisdiction to hear a dispute and is applied
0330 161 1234