[(1) Condition 1 is that the person, in acting as an insolvency practitioner or in connection with any appointment as such, has failed to comply with—
(a) a requirement imposed by the rules of the relevant recognised professional body;
(b) any standards, or code of ethics, for the insolvency-practitioner profession adopted from time to time by the relevant recognised professional body.
(2) Condition 2 is that the person—
(a) is not a fit and proper person to act as an insolvency practitioner;
(b) is a fit and proper person to act as an insolvency practitioner only in
**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
Community order requirementsThis Practice Note reflects the procedural code for sentencing offenders in England and Wales (Sentencing Code) that applies from 1 December 2020, as set out in Parts 2–13 of the Sentencing Act 2020 (SA 2020). For those considering whether the Sentencing Code applies to
Costs and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleCosts determination and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleAn issue for practitioners is whether correspondence marked ‘without prejudice’ can be used against a party when the court comes to determine the issue of costs. The Court of Appeal in Walker v Wilsher (1889)
HCPC—Main hearing of the Health and Care Professions TribunalCoronavirus (COVID-19): This Practice Note contains guidance on subjects impacted by the government’s response to the coronavirus outbreak. In particular, the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) (Coronavirus) (Amendment) Rules Order
The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 (CAR 2012) place various duties on employers to protect employees from risks related to exposure to asbestos and make it clear that these duties, so far as is reasonably practicable, are also owed to any other person, whether at work or not, who may be
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.