[(1) This section applies to a prisoner (a “terrorist prisoner”) who—
(a) is serving a fixed-term sentence imposed (whether before or after this section comes into force) in respect of an offence within subsection (2), and
(b) has not been released on licence.
(2) An offence is within this subsection (whether it was committed before or after this section comes into force) if—
(a) it is specified in Part 1 of Schedule 19ZA (offences under counter-terrorism legislation),
(b) it is specified in Part 2 of that Schedule and was determined by the court to have had a terrorist connection under section 30 [of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 or section 69 of the Sentencing Code] or (in the case of a person sentenced in Scotland but now subject to the provisions of this Chapter) section 31 of [that Act] (sentences for certain offences with a terrorist connection), or
(c) it is a service offence as respects which the corresponding civil offence is an offence specified in Part 2 of that Schedule and was determined by the service court to have had a terrorist connection un
**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 thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
You may apply simplified customer due diligence (SDD) measures in relation to particular business relationships or transactions which you determine present a low risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, having taken into account:•your organisation-wide risk assessment—see Practice Note:
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
Tipping off and prejudicing an investigationIt would undermine the benefit to the authorities if, a suspicious activity report (SAR) having been made, the alleged offender were to be made aware of the interest in their activities so that they could take steps to cover up their misdeeds or disappear.
This Practice Note considers the different categories of contractual damages that may be available for financial loss (pecuniary loss), ie expectation-based damages, reliance-based damages and gains-based damages.For guidance on contractual damages generally, see Practice Note: Contractual
0330 161 1234
To view the latest version of this document and millions of others like it, sign-in to LexisLibrary or register for a free trial.