An overage is a payment made by the purchaser after completion of a land transaction and is usually a percentage of the increase in the value of the purchased land due to planning permission or a percentage of the sale proceeds in excess of the purchase price realised on re-selling the property. The fact that the overage was granted pre-stamp duty land tax (SDLT), presumably means, that the completion of the land sale was also pre-SDLT.

It is necessary to consider the procedural requirements, in particular concerning time limits, for making an application to the Court of Protection, to appoint a deputy for a person who lacks capacity ('P'). These requirements are set out in the Court of Protection Rules 2007, SI 2007/1744 and in the various Practice Directions. Further assistance may also be derived from the guidance notes reproduced with the numerous statutory forms that have to be completed whenever an application is made to the Court of Protection. What is not prescribed however, is a specific time limit within which an application for a deputyship order must be made once an assessment of P’s capacity has been carried out and the findings recorded on a COP3 form. Rule 64 of the Rules sets out what categories of evidence are required to be filed with an application form. Where a relevant Practice Direction requires it, this

Under Part IV of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996), a non-molestation order is an order prohibiting a person (the respondent) from molesting another person who is associated with the respondent or a relevant child (FLA 1996, s 42(1)). Freestanding proceedings for a non-molestation injunction under FLA 1996, Pt IV must be commenced in the single Family Court (FLA 1996, s 57(1). There are no geographical

At the same time as lodging a draft financial consent order and statements of information in Forms D81, some courts may also require both parties (or just the respondent where there are financial order proceedings) to file a Form A marked 'for dismissal purposes only'. What statutory provision is there in relation to a Form A for dismissal purposes? There is no specific provision in the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955 that requires a Form A to be issued for dismissal purposes. Note that for the court to approve a financial consent order there must be pending proceedings, commenced by the applicant issuing an application in Form A (see Practice Note: Issuing financial order proceedings in Form A)—this Q&A is concerned with

We refer you to Commentary: Effect of appearance to warning: Tristram and Coote's Probate Practice [23.54], which states: 'If the caveator enters an appearance to the warning, no grant can issue without an order of the court. A caveat/stop in respect of which an appearance to a warning has been entered remains in force until proceedings are commenced by probate claim or otherwise directed by order made on summons by a district judge of the Principal Registry or by a registrar (rule 44(13) of the Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987 (NCPR 1987), SI 1987/2024, as amended)... A caveat may be cleared off by an order on summons,

The procedure for the variation or discharge of an order made under section 8 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989), ie including child arrangements orders, is the same as for the original application and is governed by the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 12 and FPR 2010, PD 12B. The President of the Family Division has issued guidance on continuity and deployment that applies to all private law proceedings under ChA 1989, Pt II from 22 April 2014, see: President’s Guidance on Judicial Continuity and Deployment (Private Law). See also Practice Note: Issuing private children proceedings in the Family Court,

Appointed representatives are by definition not authorised persons and are exempt from the need to obtain an authorisation, though certain individuals working for the appointed representative may need to be approved under the approved persons regime (see sections 39 and 59 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA 2000) and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) Handbook, SUP 10A.1). For more information, see Practice

The right not to be unfairly dismissed is only available to an ‘employee’. For these purposes, ‘employee’ is defined as an individual who has entered into or works under a contract of employment, ie a contract of service or apprenticeship, whether express or implied and whether oral or in writing. The right not to be unfairly dismissed generally only arises when the employee, by the effective date of termination

The term ‘secondary education’ is not defined in the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973). However, ‘education’ is defined as including training (MCA 1973, s 52(1)). The Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, specifically FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 2.3, 9.3, do not assist further. The MCA 1973, s 29 is concerned with the duration of financial provision orders in favour of children as opposed to capital orders such as a Mesher order, per Mesher v Mesher. However, MCA 1973,

’Approved English apprenticeships’, which rely on approved apprenticeship standards, were introduced in place of ‘English apprenticeships’, which relied on ‘recognised English frameworks’ with effect from 26 May 2015. For further information, see Practice Note: Apprenticeships—Apprenticeship agreements—ASCLA 2009 (no longer available). An approved English apprenticeship must currently take place under an approved English apprenticeship agreement. There is scope for the Secretary of State to introduce regulations for 'alternative English apprenticeships', however no such regulations have yet been made. For further information, see Practice Note: Apprenticeships—Approved apprenticeship agreements. An approved English apprenticeship agreement must: • provide for a person (‘the apprentice’) to work for another person for reward

STOP PRESS: From 6 April 2017, the Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925 were revoked and replaced by the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024. The content in this Q&A may have been affected by this change. It should be noted that when dealing with questions of authority in an arbitration agreement, to the extent that there is an arbitration agreement in place, it is important to review it carefully and determine whether or not it makes any express provisions regarding the arbitrator’s remedial powers. As discussed further below, it is also crucial to check whether or not your arbitration agreement excludes the arbitrator from considering the proposed claim under section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). Note: if your arbitration is to be conducted pursuant to any arbitral rules (eg the LCIA Rules 2014) then please do consider what those rules provide in relation to the arbitrator’s powers. Arbitrator remedial powers under English and Welsh law Pursuant

The claim and response are meant to set out the essence of the parties’ respective cases on paper. It is therefore best practice to include any argument that an employer has relating to a Polkey reduction within the ET3 response form. If an employer intends to argue for a Polkey reduction, but has not included this within the ET3 response form, it is best practice to raise this argument well in advance of the hearing, for example, to include it within the list of issues to be determined in the case. Clear identification of the Polkey argument will enable both parties to prepare their documentary and witness evidence accordingly. If the matter is not raised in advance of the hearing, the employer should make it clear that they wish to run a Polkey argument