This flowchart illustrates the process of making a compensation claim for additional time to complete the works and/or for additional payment under the NEC4 Engineering and Construction Contract. A flowchart setting out the process in respect

This Practice Note examines the Compensation Event and Relief Event regimes under the Project Agreement in relation to a PFI or PF2 project. It looks at the features of each regime and the difference between them under PFI and PF2 (sometimes referred to as PFII). In the 2018 Budget (delivered on 29 October 2018), it was announced that the government will no longer use PF2 on new projects (see News Analysis: Budget 2018—what does it mean for infrastructure and housebuilding?). However, existing PFI and PF2 projects will continue to run, and given the typical lifespan of such projects this is likely to be for many years. Context Compensation Events and Relief Events are two examples of 'supervening events'; events for which some relief is appropriate. The aim is to deal with the allocation of risks which may arise as a result of various unintended occurrences which adversely affect the Contractor's ability to deliver its obligations under the Project Agreement (or, by extension, the ability of its sub-contractors to deliver under their respective sub-contracts). Such

Farm business tenancy — compulsory acquisition of tenant’s interest Where land is: • used for agriculture (within the meaning of the Agricultural Tenancies Act 1995 (ATA 1995)) by way of a trade or business, or • comprised in a farm business tenancy (within the meaning of ATA 1995) and used for a trade or business and the tenant (the person carrying on the trade or business) is forced to quit the land because an interest in it is either compulsorily acquired or sold by agreement to an authority with compulsory purchase powers, the acquiring authority can pay such reasonable allowance as it thinks fit towards the tenant’s removal expenses and the loss that, in its opinion, the tenant will sustain due to the disturbance to the tenant’s trade or business. In estimating the tenant’s loss, the acquiring authority must consider the period that the land might reasonably have been expected to be available for the trade or business, and the availability of other land suitable for that purpose. In addition, the tenant may also

Property analysis: The circumstances in which highway authorities have to pay compensation for preventing property owners accessing public highways from their property are examined by Timothy Straker QC and Sappho Dias, of 4–5 Gray’s Inn Square, in light of a recent Supreme Court judgment.

Property Disputes analysis: The court ordered compensation to be paid under section 37A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) on the basis that the landlord, at a previous County Court trial of contested lease renewal proceedings, had deliberately misrepresented its intentions as to the nature of the purported business that it claimed to intend to operate from the demised premises at the termination of the tenancy. The Court found that the misrepresentation had induced the County Court Judge to refuse the grant of a new lease. Written by Alexander Hill-Smith, barrister at New Square Chambers, Lincoln’s Inn.

Background Data subjects have the right to bring complaints and to seek judicial remedies and compensation if their rights under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR) are breached. This includes a right of any person who has suffered ‘material or non-material damage’ as a result of an infringement of the EU GDPR to receive compensation from the controller or processor for that damage under Article 82 of the EU GDPR. Equivalent provisions apply under Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 (the EU GDPR equivalent applicable to the EU institutions). Consequently, compensation may be recovered for both pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses. Indeed, Recital 146 of the EU GDPR explains that the ‘concept of damage should be broadly interpreted’ and ‘in a manner which fully reflects the objectives of this Regulation’. Under the EU GDPR controllers have much broader liability than processors. Any controller involved in unlawful processing is liable for the damage caused. On the other hand, a processor is liable only for the damage caused by processing where

EU law analysis: In this case, the applicant’s personal data was transferred to the US by the European Commission. The Commission was found not to have complied with its obligations under Regulation 2018/1725 to provide appropriate safeguards for international transfers of personal data. Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 is the data protection framework applicable to EU institutions, which aligns closely with the principles and requirements of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR), and ensures the protection of personal data within the EU institutional context. Although the Court rejected several of the applicant’s claims, it ordered the Commission to pay €400 to the applicant for non-material damages suffered. The Court reasoned that damages were actual and certain, since the applicant was put in a position of some uncertainty regarding the processing of his personal data. The decision is relevant for interpreting the equivalent rules applying to controllers and processors (including private sector organisations) under the EU GDPR and highlights the importance of ensuring that appropriate safeguards are in place before personal data is transferred outside the EEA. Written by Paul Greaves, counsel at Alston & Bird LLP.

Law360: Compensation for retirement savers who were wrongly advised to transfer out of their defined benefit pension has hit a record low, OAC said on 10 April 2024.

Family analysis: Lucy Stone QC, a barrister at QEB, who represented the respondent in RC v JC, examines the circumstances in which the court found that the wife had suffered a significant relationship generated disadvantage and was therefore entitled to an award of compensation.

This Practice Note contains a number of tables setting out the statutory limits on compensation (with the appropriate calculation) for all types of employment tribunal claim, plus any applicable qualification period of continuous employment. This Practice Note also sets out the current maximum week’s pay and compensatory award, minimum basic award (eg for trade union, health and safety, working time representative, pension scheme trustee and employee representative dismissals and others) and the maximum guarantee payment per day. The tables contain links to all relevant legislation and Practice Note materials. The limits in these tables are listed by topic, for example, discrimination, whistleblowing, unfair dismissal. Click on the links in the Table of Contents to navigate to the relevant topic. The annual indexation of limits for a week's pay, guarantee payments, maximum compensation for tribunal claims etc takes effect from 6 April each year. The tables set out, where relevant, the applicable rates for the current year (ie the rate that applies from 6 April 2026 onwards), as well as the rates relating to two preceding

An order that a convicted person must pay compensation for loss or damage caused by the convicted person.

The procedural rules relating to the criminal courts’ powers to make compensation orders are contained in sections 133–146 of the Sentencing Act 2020 (SA 2020) (also known as the Sentencing Code). For information on the introduction and applicability of SA 2020, see Practice Note: Sentencing Code. When sentencing a convicted offender, the sentencing court will consider whether a compensation order should be made in favour of the victim(s). Compensation orders may be made instead of, or in addition to another sentence and can be made against both individual and corporate defendants. Applicable offence specific guidelines issued by the Sentencing Council specifically direct the courts to consider compensation to the victims of crime. Practitioners should therefore consult the Sentencing Council’s offence specific guidelines, which indicate whether a compensation order is available following conviction. These guidelines provide a concise overview of the circumstances in which a compensation order can be made, the factors which the court must take into consideration when determining an appropriate level of compensation and suggest compensation ranges for different categories of common