Comparison of a scheme's assets and liabilities. Determined as part of an actuarial valuation and usually expressed as a percentage.

The high level of demand, globally, for public infrastructure at a time when public revenues are restricted and banks are less willing to lend, has led to new and varied ways of funding infrastructure development. Below is an overview of the typical sources of funding and funding models employed for infrastructure development. A detailed review of the available financial structures and products for funding infrastructure is beyond the scope of this practice note. Factors influencing source of funding The source of funding for any given infrastructure project depends upon: • the party/parties procuring the infrastructure project—is it a government body, private company or consortium? Does it have a strong track record? Are the parties or their sponsors investment grade? • the finances of the procuring party—do they have available funds or do they need to raise finance? • the security package—if the procuring party needs to raise finance, what entities, assets and documents will be included in the lenders’ security package? • the location of the project—for instance, is it in a developed country, a developing country or

The funding target is the value that should cover future payments from a scheme. The figure ignores future contributions and benefits earned in the future and is often the same as the technical provisions.

A funding update reports the results of an interim valuation calculation. Most schemes are required to have annual funding updates. The Pensions Regulator also refers to funding updates as actuarial reports.

Option 1: Self-funded We have discussed various options for funding your costs, such as: • legal expenses insurance, eg under your house or car insurance; • a no win no fee agreement; • via a trade union or other membership organisation; • a third party funding agreement; and • [add any other method you may have discussed] It appears that none of these options is available or suitable and you have therefore agreed to pay our charges privately. These are shown above. In addition to our charges, you will also be responsible for: • disbursements that we incur on your matter; and • any costs you may become liable to pay to a third party, eg [your opponent] We will invoice you for our costs and disbursements [monthly OR every six months OR when we have reached the next stage in your matter which is

This Practice Note considers the charging and funding of family law services, including contractual terms, regulatory requirements including the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) regulatory regime and other guidance from the Law Society and the Legal Ombudsman as well as methods of charging, such as fixed fees, hourly rates, blended rates and ‘unbundling’. Contractual relationship The solicitor and client contract for services is a key element in the business relationship. Handled well, it can boost reputation, handled badly it can damage the relationship and cause loss to the firm, sometimes both financially and to reputation. This Practice Note provides guidance on the underlying principles and how to manage charging for legal advice in family cases. At the heart of any business is cash flow. The key elements for family lawyers are how much and how to charge for family law services. A firm must be profitable as unprofitability may put the firm at risk. When reviewing charging, practitioners should consider: • the terms of business, ie the contractual relationship with the client

In proceedings under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) and the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004), the court may order a party to make payment to their spouse/civil partner for their legal costs, known as an order in respect of legal services or a legal services order, also referred to in case law as a legal services payment order. A legal services order is available in proceedings for divorce/dissolution, nullity or (judicial) separation, and in connected financial remedy proceedings (referred to as proceedings for financial relief). The provisions set out the circumstances in which such an order may be made and the factors that the court must take into account. Legal services orders are not available under the statutory provisions in MCA 1973 and CPA 2004 in proceedings under Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989), the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 and Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (MFPA 1984) or its CPA 2004 equivalent. However, a body of case law with roots that

Self-regulatory regime in Scotland Apart from some limited statutory provisions, charity fundraising in Scotland is self-regulated. In July 2016, the regulatory regime was referred to as ‘enhanced self-regulation’ following a review of the regulatory regime carried out on behalf of the Scottish Government, and that principle continues to underlie the regime now in force. Enhanced self-regulation places the initial onus on charities when complaints about fundraising practice arise. The expectation is that fundraising staff (where there are any) will attempt to resolve a complaint about a charity’s fundraising in the first instance. If this is unsuccessful, the second stage in any complaint about fundraising would be a direct complaint to the charity trustees. Role of the Scottish Fundraising Adjudication Panel If a complaint requires to be escalated beyond a charity’s trustees, the third and final step in the process is to take a fundraising complaint to the Scottish Fundraising Adjudication Panel (the Panel), formerly known as the Scottish Fundraising Standards Panel. The Panel was established for the specific purpose of dealing with such escalated

Intellectual Property analysis: EasyGroup Ltd's (‘EasyGroup’) trade mark infringement action against a charity reward shopping site, Easyfundraising (‘EFL’), has failed. Notwithstanding EasyGroup's ‘family’ of trade mark rights, the court dismissed its claims and, in particular, criticised:(i) EasyGroup's delay in seeking formal recourse in respect of EFL's alleged infringing activity; and (ii) the quality of some of the evidence relied upon by EasyGroup to advance its pleaded case. In the judgment, Mr Justice Fancourt provides useful commentary on the relationship between a ‘family’ of trade marks and enhanced distinctiveness, as well as valuable insight into the assessment of damage to repute under section 10(3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 (TMA 1994). Written by Amanda McDowall, partner and Sophie Anim, associate at Lee & Thompson LLP.

A collection of assets managed in accordance with an objective for the mutual benefit of all the investors. The investors' share in a unit-linked life or pensions fund is represented by the number of units within the fund that they have been allocated by the life company.

Ireland—Banking & Financial Service analysis: This article, was written by Etain de Valera, Donnacha O’Connor, Brian Dillon, Brian Higgins, Brian Kelliher, Cillian Bredin, Colman O’Loughlen, David Walsh, Derbhil O’Riordan & Shane Coveney of Dillon Eustace.

Private fund limited partnerships and limited partnerships under the Limited Partnerships Act 1907 are often used as fund structures for private equity, venture capital and property funds marketed to institutional investors (including pension funds). For high-level information about the private equity market in the UK, including the use of UK limited partnerships as fund vehicles, the regulation of fund managers under the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (Directive 2011/61/EU) regime, as implemented and retained