The wrongful withdrawal of support will in general entitle the injured party to an injunction1 to restrain the defendant from further working the mines2 so as to let down the surface3. However, a mandatory injunction to carry out works to restore support may be refused if it is not possible to identify the steps the defendant should take, or if the costs to the defendant are likely to be disproportionate4. An injunction to restrain working may prescribe no limits within which the workings are restrained5, and whilst in form it may presuppose the possibility of working the mines without
**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 considers the legal concept of mistake in contract law. It examines common mistake, mutual mistake, unilateral mistake, mistake as to identity and mistake as to the document signed (non est factum). It also considers the impact of each of these types of mistake on the contract and
Coronavirus (COVID-19): The guidance detailing normal practice set out in this Practice Note may be affected by measures concerning process and procedure in the civil courts that have been introduced as a result of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. For guidance, see Practice Note: Coronavirus
Case number [insert number][In the principal registryORIn the [insert court location] FAMILY court]Sitting at [insert place]Notice of actingBetween[insert petitioner name]Petitionerand[insert respondent name]RespondentTake notice that we [insert name of firm] have been appointed to act as the
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