Affirmation Definition

View the related checklists about Affirmation

Civil contempt proceedings—checklist

Civil contempt proceedings—checklist This Checklist on civil contempt proceedings summarises the different types of civil contempt, the key factors to consider when bringing proceedings for civil contempt, whether permission is required, how to make the application and what to include in it. This Checklist also considers the potential adverse costs consequences of making an unsuccessful application for civil contempt. Considerations Guidance Further guidance and information The different types of civil contempt It is important to understand the different types of civil contempt.Civil contempt proceedings under CPR 81 may be brought for non-compliance with a court order or undertaking or knowingly making a false statement in any affidavit, affirmation or other document verified by a statement of truth or in a disclosure statement. They can also be brought for interference with the due administration of justice or contempt committed in the face of court (ie where the contempt is directly in the court’s presence).It is often the case that a particular allegation straddles more than one type of civil contempt....

Preparing for a remote hearing in international arbitration—checklist

Preparing for a remote hearing in international arbitration—checklist When preparing for a remote (virtual) hearing in arbitration proceedings there are many logistical and practical considerations to be taken into account, planned and, often, budgeted for. This Checklist should help ensure the key aspects of a remote hearing have been considered in advance so the process runs as smoothly as possible. This Checklist refers to both fully-remote hearings (when all participants are appearing remotely) and hybrid hearings (when some of the participants are present at the same location while the others are appearing remotely). Where relevant, specific considerations in relation to those two forms of hearing are set out in this Checklist. While they can bear different meanings and some practitioners have preferences for one or the other, the terms remote and virtual are used interchangeably for the purposes of this Checklist. This Checklist contemplates the requirements of merits, rather than procedural, remote hearings, although some of the points made will be relevant to both hearing types. This Checklist assumes that...

View the related practice notes about Affirmation

Affirmation

Affirmation is an indication of the intention to continue with a contract. Affirmation may arise in the case of:•a repudiatory breach of contract (including anticipatory breach (renunciation)), or•a misrepresentation which entitles the innocent party to rescind the contractIt is important to understand what affirmation is and what it requires in order to be aware of the risks should a counterparty be in repudiatory breach. Failure to understand could lead to your client not successfully affirming a contract it wishes to continue or inadvertently losing its rights to terminate by accepting a repudiatory breach.This Practice Note focuses on affirmation in the event of repudiatory breach. For information on affirmation in the context of misrepresentation, see Affirmation where other remedies are available below.Affirmation and repudiatory breachA repudiatory breach is a breach of contract that goes to the very core of the contract entitling the innocent party to treat the contract as being disregarded and to refuse to be bound by its terms.Where there is a repudiatory breach of contract, the innocent party...

Verification of documents and information

This Practice Note covers how information contained in a document or statement made by or on behalf of a person, can be relied on where there is a requirement to validate its authenticity in a commercial context. There are a number of ways to validate information and documents and this Practice Note explains when statutory declarations, oaths, affirmations and affidavits may be used; how to check that these have been correctly prepared, and includes guidance for practitioners when using these methods of validation. This Practice Note looks at the requirements for the following:•Statutory declarations•Oaths•Affirmations•Affidavits•Formalities for administering statutory declarations, oaths, affirmations and affidavits•Statutory declarations and affidavits out of jurisdictionFor information on notaries, their purpose, steps required to notarise a document and the meaning of legalisation, see Practice Note: Notaries and notarisation.For guidance on certified copies, including what a certified copy is, when is a certified copy required, who can certify a document, what format the certification should take, use of certified copies internationally and their use in evidence, see Practice Note:...

View the related precedents about Affirmation

Letter of request (Form A)—Taking of Evidence Regulation (application in the UK) [Archived]

Letter of request (Form A)—Taking of Evidence Regulation (application in the UK) [Archived] An application can no longer be made in the courts of England and Wales for the taking of evidence under Regulation (EC) 1206/2001, the Taking of Evidence regulation. For applications made prior to IP completion day (31 December at 11 pm), the process for the taking of evidence will continue under the regulation if the transitional provisions in the Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU were met by that date. For guidance on the transitional provisions, see Practice Note: Brexit post implementation period—considerations for dispute resolution practitioners including, in particular, main section: Taking of evidence. Request for the taking of evidence (Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (OJ L 174, 27.6.2001, p. 1)) 1 Reference of the requesting court: 2 Reference of the requested court: 3 Requesting court: 3.1 Name: 3.2...

Letter of request (Form A)—Taking of Evidence Regulation (recast)

Letter of request (Form A)—Taking of Evidence Regulation (recast) The application shall be made between the courts of EU Member States in civil or commercial matters for the taking of evidence under Regulation (EU) 2020/1783, Taking of Evidence Regulation (recast). For guidance on the Taking of Evidence Regulation (recast), see Practice Note: Taking of Evidence Regulation (recast). Request for the taking of evidence (Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2020/1783 on co-operation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (Taking of Evidence Regulation (recast)). 1 Reference No of the requesting court: 2 Requesting court: 2.1 Name: 2.2 Address: 2.2.1 Street and No/PO box: 2.2.2 Place and postcode: 2.2.3 Country: 2.3 Tel. 2.4 Fax 2.5 Email 3 Requested court: 3.1 Name: 3.2 Address: 3.2.1 Street and No/PO box: 3.2.2 Place and postcode: 3.2.3 Country: 3.3 Tel. 3.4 Fax 3.5 Email 4 In the case brought by the Claimant/petitioner(s) 4.1 Name: 4.2 Address: 4.2.1 Street and No/PO box: 4.2.2 Place and postcode: 4.2.3...

View the related q&as about Affirmation

Can a party to a general commercial contract accept a notice terminating for convenience which has not been served in accordance with the requirements of the contract and will such acceptance result in the contract terminating on the date set out in the notice?

Can a party to a general commercial contract accept a notice terminating for convenience which has not been served in accordance with the requirements of the contract and will such acceptance result in the contract terminating on the date set out in the notice? This Q&A assumes that the question relates to a business-to-business contract. A contract may be brought to an end in a number of different ways. For more information, see Practice Note: Termination and expiry of contracts. Where an agreement includes a right to terminate for convenience, to avoid arguments as to the effectiveness of the exercise of such right, close attention should be paid to the requirements of the agreement including any notices clause. The courts generally require strict compliance with the requirements of notice clauses. The effectiveness and consequences of a purported exercise of a right to terminate for convenience will depend on the construction of the agreement as a whole and the surrounding factual context. The courts have found a number of termination notices...

What should be taken into account when drafting a contract for the supply of goods or services in light of statutory controls on rights in the event the customer is subject to an insolvency procedure including under the new Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020?

What should be taken into account when drafting a contract for the supply of goods or services in light of statutory controls on rights in the event the customer is subject to an insolvency procedure including under the new Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020? Restriction on termination clauses in supply contracts The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA 2020) introduces a permanent change to the use of termination clauses in supply contracts by introducing a new provision, section 233B, into the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). As a result of the measure, where a company has entered an insolvency or restructuring procedure or obtains a moratorium, the company’s suppliers of goods and services (with certain prescribed exceptions) will not be able to rely on contractual terms to terminate the contract, stop supplying, or vary the contract terms with the company (for example—increasing the price of supplies). The customer is required to pay for any supplies made once the insolvency process has commenced, but is not required to...

View the related News about Affirmation

Unfair prejudice and breach of fiduciary duty (Saxon Woods Investments v Costa)

Dispute Resolution analysis: The Court of Appeal held (overturning the first instance decision) that, where the unfairly prejudicial conduct of the majority involved them acting dishonestly and in breach of fiduciary duty, the petitioner was entitled to a share purchase order under section 996 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) even if the petitioner was no worse off financially than he would have been if unfairly prejudicial conduct had not occurred. This was so even if the majority genuinely believed that by its unfairly prejudicial conduct it would achieve a better financial outcome for members. The judgment is also interesting for its analysis of the overlap between the concepts of good faith and honesty and for the affirmation of the objective test of honesty. Written by David Fisher, barrister, New Square Chambers.

Three key takeaways from the UK’s litigation funding review

Law360, London: A government-backed review has set out 58 recommendations to reform the litigation funding sector in England and Wales, in a move that could deliver a significant boost to third-party funders after two years of uncertainty.