It is currently possible for people with leave to remain as a partner on the five-year route to make a change of conditions application and obtain access to public funds without being transferred to the ten-year route. The Home Office caseworker guidance has been updated to clarify that in cases where the NRPF condition has been lifted, the person's circumstances will be re-assessed when they apply for further permission and consideration should be given to whether they meet the financial requirement. If they do meet the financial requirement, but are currently in receipt of public funds, the Home Office will contact the person to ask whether they wish their application to be considered under the ten-year partner route instead of the five-year route.

Introduction The time is now [insert the exact time] and I am opening the meeting of creditors of [insert name of the company or LLP (Company)] called as a general meeting of creditors under the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) and the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024 as amended. I am [insert name], of [insert firm or company name] [insert details of role of the chair, eg adviser/[joint] administrator/[provisional] liquidator etc]. The meeting that is taking place today is quorate, as the required minimum number of creditors has been reached. The meeting[s] that [is OR are] taking place today [has OR have] been convened by me (or requisitioned by creditors) for the purposes of dealing with the following resolutions [delete/amend as appropriate]: • fixing the basis of the office-holder’s remuneration • obtaining sanction from the creditors (in the absence of a [creditors’ OR liquidation] committee having been formed previously) • forming a [creditors’ OR liquidation] committee • accepting proposals • removing the office-holder [if that is the purpose of the requisitioned meeting]

Ireland—Commercial analysis: This article was written by A&L Goodbody’s Technology Team. It provides a practical breakdown of transparency obligations.

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note is intended to act as a guide to the main changes implemented through the recast of Brussels I and explains the transitional arrangements to enable you to determine whether the new provisions are applicable to the matter you are dealing with. This Practice Note was written in January 2015 and will not be subject to further update. The links in the Related Documents are to maintained documents and give the up to date position. Transitional arrangements Brussels I (recast) will only apply to matters in which relevant events take place on or after 10 January 2015 (art 66). Those events are: • legal proceedings have been instigated • authentic documents have been drawn up or registered • court settlements have been approved or concluded Warning: art 80 states that Brussels I (recast) repeals Brussels I. However, art 66 specifically states that, notwithstanding that provision, Brussels I will continue to apply to judgments given in legal proceedings instigated prior

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note provides a guide as to what legislation and guidance was repealed, revoked, replaced and cancelled as a result of the implementation of the Care Act 2014. It is not maintained and is for background information only. With the coming into effect of part of the Care Act 2014 (CA 2014) in April 2015 there will be a number of repeals, revocations and cancellations of statutory provisions and guidance. Orders have been and will be made under CA 2014 to bring this into effect. The bringing into effect of the remainder of CA 2014 is still unclear. The cap on care costs provisions and the duty on local authorities to meet the eligible needs of self funders in care homes are delayed until April 2020. The introduction of the proposed appeals system for care and support is also delayed. Guidance was issued in October 2014 and corrective guidance in March 2015 and it is to be hoped that the following lists are an indication of all those repeals. Note

1 Introduction 1.1 This guidance note is a companion to the following Lexis+® UK precedent development agreements: ◦ Agreement for lease—developer landlord to carry out major works ◦ Property development agreement (sometimes also referred to as a ‘building agreement’) ◦ Forward funding agreement 1.2 Sections 1 to 31 of this note contain general points that apply to all development agreements. Sections 32 to 34 contain points which are specifically relevant to Precedents: Property development agreement, Agreement for lease—developer landlord to carry out major works and Forward funding agreement. 2 Terminology 2.1 In this note, the following terms are used: Term Meaning Developer The person who constructs, redevelops or refurbishes a building in order to make a profit, generally by selling on the completed development (with or without tenants) or by retaining the development and letting it to one or more tenants (the latter is rarer, as most developers are not in the business of being landlords of commercial property). In the context of building contracts, often also referred

The Guide to Judicial Conduct has been fully revised and is intended to offer assistance to judges, coroners and magistrates about their conduct. The guide contains a set of core principles to assist judges in reaching their own decisions. It does not set out rules and nor it is a code to be adhered to.

This Practice Note examines the issues for both a developer landlord and a prospective tenant in relation to an agreement for lease with development obligations (otherwise known as a ‘pre-let’ or ‘pre-letting agreement’) where: (i) the property to be let has not yet been constructed or will undergo substantial refurbishment, (ii) the landlord is to completion of the required works by a projected target date, and (iii) following which the tenant will take a lease of the property. It also considers ancillary issues in relation to early access, tenant’s fit out, insurance, etc. Terminology in this Practice Note This Practice Note uses the following terminology: ‘Pre-let’ A ‘pre-let’ is an agreement for lease with major developer’s works. This type of agreement is also sometimes referred to as a ‘pre-letting agreement’ or a ‘development agreement’, but the latter term in particular has the potential to cause confusion because it is also used to describe either: • a ‘stand alone’ development agreement, where a landowner contracts with a developer to carry out a development project,

ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note looks at the administration of Monarch Airlines which took place in 2017. It is not maintained and is for background information only. This Practice Note forms part of a set of Practice Notes on airline insolvency. For further information, see Practice Notes: • Guide to airline insolvency—introduction • Guide to airline insolvency—insolvency proceedings, receivership, restructuring plans and schemes of arrangement • Guide to airline insolvency—international considerations Background and lead-up to administration Prior to its entry into administration on 2 October 2017, Monarch Airlines was an airline operating scheduled flights to tour operators, travel agents and directly to consumers to and from five UK airports (Birmingham, Leeds-Bradford, Gatwick, Luton and Manchester), to and from 44 destinations, most of which were in the Mediterranean and the Canary Islands. Along with many airlines worldwide, it had encountered difficult market conditions and, in 2014, it underwent an extensive restructuring process. In 2015, the group returned to profitability. However, continued challenging conditions in the European aviation market

This Practice Note forms part of a set of Practice Notes on airline insolvency, for further information, see Practice Notes: • Guide to airline insolvency—introduction • Guide to airline insolvency—international considerations and implications for office-holders Insolvency proceedings The commencement of insolvency proceedings with respect to an airline can mean different things from the perspective of a financier, depending on the type of proceedings and how they have been instituted. The types of insolvency proceedings most commonly encountered in the context of airline insolvencies in the UK are administration, liquidation and receivership (although strictly the latter is a contractual remedy rather than a formal insolvency procedure). Following the enactment of the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA 2020), it is possible for companies to enter into a free-standing moratorium process to afford limited protection from certain creditor claims and enforcement actions. There have been no instances to date of an airline entering into a moratorium. The adoption in 2015 by the UK of the Cape

This Practice Note forms part of a set of Practice Notes on airline insolvency, for further information, see Practice Notes: • Guide to airline insolvency—introduction • Guide to airline insolvency—insolvency proceedings, receivership, restructuring plans and schemes of arrangement Cross-border issues In the event of an airline entering into insolvency proceedings, it may be necessary for the responsible insolvency office-holder or a lessor or financier to take action to recover property in a large number of jurisdictions, depending on the size and geographical reach of the airline’s business. In the case of insolvency office-holders, it will be necessary to consider the applicability of the Cape Town Convention (see Practice Note: Guide to airline insolvency—insolvency proceedings, receivership, restructuring plans and schemes of arrangement). In the case of aircraft and other assets located in jurisdictions which have implemented the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, it may be possible for the office-holder concerned to seek recognition and assistance in those jurisdictions (as to which, see generally: UNCITRAL Model Law and Cross-Border

Introduction to the airline industry The purpose of this Practice Note is to provide an overview of some of the key features of airline insolvencies in England and Wales and to highlight certain legal and practical considerations which can inform strategies and outcomes when an airline enters into insolvency proceedings. This Practice Note forms part of a set of Practice Notes on airline insolvency. For further information, see Practice Notes: • Guide to airline insolvency—insolvency proceedings, receivership, restructuring plans and schemes of arrangement • Guide to airline insolvency—international considerations and implications for office-holders There are certain aspects of the airline industry which differentiate airline insolvencies from insolvencies of companies in many other business sectors. In particular: • the financing arrangements for the manufacture and purchase of aircraft, and the associated ownership and leasing arrangements, can be extremely complex and often vary considerably from case-to-case • the airline industry is heavily regulated and the regulations to which airlines are subject can impose limitations on the manner in which they operate and the ease with