Dispute Resolution analysis: Datin Jeyanthini Kannaperan, partner, Koo Yin Soon, senior associate, and Pauline Low, associate, all at Shearn Delamore & Co, outline the digitisation of the court system in Malaysia from its initial implementation in 2009 through to the changes and innovations that are currently on the horizon for the judicial system in the jurisdiction.

Private Client analysis: The decision that being provided with nutrition and hydration was contrary to JP’s best interests is recorded in a separate judgment (NHS South East London Integrated Care Board v JP & Others. This judgment focused on the delay in bringing the matter to court, which delay ‘compromised [JP]’s dignity’ (para [5]). Incapacitious individuals like JP are uniquely vulnerable and their interests require vigilant protection. Their inherent dignity as human beings requires regular assessment of where their best interests lie. Hospital trusts, charities, and ICBs all have to be proactive in promoting the dignity of such individuals. Disputes between family members must not be permitted to delay applications being made to court; instead, they are a signal to make an application. Family members are consulted to illuminate P’s likely wishes and feelings and values and beliefs, not to ascertain the family’s views on what is best. Sensitivity to strongly held family views should not be permitted to detract from the proper focus of decision-making: P’s best interests. Written by Katherine Hampshire, barrister at Serjeants’ Inn.

Disrepair which has arisen as a result of a breach of a tenant’s repairing and decorating obligations in a lease. The claim for damages for the breach can be interim (made during the term of a lease) or terminal (made at the end of a lease).

This Practice Note sets out how damages for dilapidations are dealt with once a lease term has ended and covers the common law position, the statutory cap under the two limbs of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 (LTA 1927), s 18(1), the principle of supersession, and procedural issues including the Dilapidations Protocol. Once a lease has ended, the landlord can no longer forfeit or rely on a Jervis v Harris clause. At that stage, damages are the only available remedy and the amount recoverable is governed by: • common law principles for the assessment of damages for breach of a covenant to repair, and • section 18(1) of the LTA 1927, which limits, and in some cases extinguishes, the amount otherwise recoverable for disrepair (‘the statutory cap’) Damages—common law At common law, the measure of damages for disrepair is the reasonable cost of putting the property into the state in which it ought to have been left (plus loss of rent and other losses during the period of the works).

This Practice Note covers the various potential remedies for breach of tenant’s repairing obligations during the currency of the lease term, including an interim claim for damages for disrepair, forfeiture (and the restrictions of the Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938), service of a notice to repair under a ‘Jervis and Harris’ clause and specific performance. For claims for dilapidations after expiry of the term, see Practice Note: Dilapidations claims at the end of the term. The available claims are: • damages • forfeiture • entry and repair under a ‘Jervis v Harris’ clause • specific performance Claim for damages for disrepair during lease term During the term of a lease, a claim for damages for breach of a tenant's repairing covenant may not be an effective remedy because: • where the Leasehold Property (Repairs) Act 1938 (LP(R)A 1938) applies, (ie where there is a fixed term of seven years or more, with three or more years remaining), and the tenant claims the benefit of it, leave of the court is required before a

This Practice Note deals with the options available to commercial tenants where a landlord of commercial property has failed to comply with repairing obligations, including claims for specific performance, damages, self-help remedies, rent set-off and bringing the lease to an end, and compares the advantages and disadvantages of each option. For claims by tenants of residential property, see Practice Note: Residential tenancies—landlord’s implied covenant of fitness for human habitation and statutory obligation to repair. For claims by landlords against tenants during the term, see Practice Note: Dilapidations during the term—claims by the landlord. For guidance on how to assess whether there has been a breach of repairing obligations generally, see Practice Note: What is the appropriate standard of repair? A tenant whose landlord is in breach of its repairing obligations has several options to try to remedy the situation: • an order for specific performance • self help • a claim for damages • set-off against rent • end the lease Order for specific performance An order for specific performance or mandatory injunction

The Pre-action Protocol for Claims for Damages in Relation to the Physical State of Commercial Property at Termination of a Tenancy (the 'Dilapidations Protocol') requires the landlord to serve the tenant with a ‘Quantified Demand’ setting out all the losses that are claimed. Any quantified demand is case-specific, but the following notes will assist you through the process of preparing one. Form of demand The demand can be set out as a letter with different headings or as a table in the format suggested by the RICS guidance note Dilapidations in England and Wales, 7th edition (September 2016). As with the schedule of dilapidations, it should be served within a reasonable time of the end of the lease. The reasonable time may vary from case to case but is generally 56 days. Where the quantified demand is prepared by the landlord’s surveyor, they must have regard to the principles laid down in the RICS guidance note. The demand should be a separate document from the

The response to a quantified demand under the Dilapidations pre-action protocol is case specific, but the following notes will assist you through the process. Format of the Response The response is dealt with at paragraph 5 of the Dilapidations Protocol. A tenant should respond using the Schedule of Dilapidations prepared by the landlord’s surveyor. If correctly prepared it will be in a Scott schedule format and there will be a column for the tenant’s comments. The responses to each item should be set out in enough

Dilatory tactics are procedural manoeuvres used primarily to delay legal proceedings rather than to advance the merits of a party’s case. They may include repeated adjournment applications, excessive or unfocused disclosure requests, late amendments, unnecessary interlocutory motions, or non-compliance designed to trigger further hearings or correspondence.Across England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, “dilatory tactics” is a descriptive term rather than a defined statutory concept, but the underlying behaviour is regulated through case management powers, costs sanctions and rules against abuse of process (for example under the Civil Procedure Rules, Rules of the Court of Session, and equivalent rules in Northern Ireland and Ireland).Courts in all four jurisdictions emphasise the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly and proportionately. Where a court finds that a party or its representatives are deploying dilatory tactics, it may refuse extensions, strike out pleadings, grant summary judgment, make indemnity or wasted costs orders, or otherwise penalise the offending party. Allegations of dilatory tactics are therefore significant in case management disputes, professional conduct issues, and costs arguments.

The law of diligence provides legal procedures by which a court order is enforced for the benefit of creditors.

This Practice Note considers the position in Scotland. For guidance on: • other forms of diligence in Scottish civil procedure, see Practice Note: Enforcement in Scottish civil litigation which, in turn, links through to detailed guidance on a number of forms of diligence available in Scotland • the equivalent in England and Wales, see: Introduction to enforcement—overview which, as well as giving an overview of this topic, links through to more detailed guidance on various aspects of domestic enforcement in England and Wales • cross-border enforcement, see Practice Note: Cross-border enforcement—a guide for dispute resolution practitioners which, as well as giving an overview of this topic, links through to more detailed guidance on various aspects of cross-border enforcement In 2020, the Scottish Government began a policy review of diligence measures in Scotland and this led to the Bankruptcy and Diligence (Scotland) Act 2024, which received Royal Assent on 15 July 2024. See Practice Note: Enforcement in Scottish civil litigation—Methods of enforcement in Scotland for details. Key: • CSA 1991—Child

A reduction in earnings per share and book value per share due to an increase in the number of shares issued. This can occur if convertible securities are converted or warrants or employee stock options are exercised.