CPR 36 provides a self-contained procedural code for the making and accepting of settlement offers (CPR 36.1(1)). It in particular provides for specific costs consequences upon the acceptance (CPR 36.13) or non-acceptance after trial (CPR 36.17) of Part 36 compliant offers. In order for an offer to be Part 36 compliant, it must, amongst other matters, specify a period of not less than 21 days within which the defendant will be liable for the claimant’s costs if the offer is accepted. To this end, the general rule is that Part 36 offers should be made at least 21 days before the start of trial. Offers

Liability in tort may arise in a number of different ways in connection with construction operations, for example liability for damage to adjoining/neighbouring land and buildings. For liability in negligence to be established, four elements must exist: • duty of care • breach of that duty of care • damage (which is caused by the breach) • foreseeability of that damage For more information see Practice Notes: Key elements to establish a claim in negligence, Negligence in construction and, more generally, subtopic: Tort for construction lawyers. For practical purposes, the test of whether a duty arises is (in effect) whether the harm in question was reasonably foreseeable (Murphy v Brentwood) in accordance with the principles articulated in the speech of Lord Atkin in Donoghue v Stevenson. Where the loss arises out of physical damage to property, and this

Pursuant to CPR 15.4, a party is required to file a defence 14 days after deemed service of the particulars of claim or, if an acknowledgment of service is filed, 28 days after deemed service of the particulars of claim. If a defendant does not think that it will be able to file and serve its defence within the above deadlines, the defendant is entitled to agree an extension of time with the claimant of up to 28 days pursuant to CPR 15.5. Save for the situation where the parties agree to stay the substantive proceedings,

Exclusion of evidence from the trial Relevant evidence must concern an issue in the case. That may be so whether or not that issue is actively disputed (although, in practice, agreed relevant facts should be efficiently placed before the court). Matters that do not need to be proved, and that do not assist in logically determining the issues of fact (or law) that must be proved, may be regarded as irrelevant to the trial of an alleged offence. It is the duty of the court to stop irrelevant evidence, though it may not always be initially obvious to a court what the relevance or otherwise might be. Evidence that is of no logical relevance clearly fails the test. Further, it has been said that prosecution evidence may also be excluded (apparently as a discretionary matter) if its relevance is so slight as

We have spoken to Giselle Terry (the assistant private secretary to the Chancellor) who has confirmed that attendance at the Chancery Division Court Users' Committee

There are a number of ways that indefinite leave to enter or remain can be lost. Lapsing leave When a person with indefinite leave in the UK travels outside the Common Travel Area, ie the UK, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and Ireland, under the Immigration (Leave to Enter and Remain) Order 2000, SI 2000/1161, art 13(4), their leave does not lapse provided they are not absent from the UK for a continuous period of more than two years. This is the ‘two-year’ rule and is subject to the limited exceptions found in SI 2000/1161, arts 13(A) and 13(B). See Practice Note: Applying as a returning resident. Cancelling indefinite leave Practice Note: Applying as a returning resident, under the heading ‘Cancelling and revoking indefinite leave’ explains that indefinite leave can be cancelled by the UK immigration authorities or the Home Office, where a person has leave which is in force and is returning to the UK or is outside the UK. The power

Share transfer mechanisms Is it possible for a person who holds shares in a private limited company to agree by contractual arrangement terms providing for the transfer of such shares for no consideration upon the earlier to occur of (a) the passage of a specified period of time and (b) that person’s death? You may wish to consider the following Precedents and their associated drafting notes as a possible means of achieving the aims set out in the Q&A: • Call option agreement—this document can be used by a company’s shareholder to grant an option to purchase shares in the capital of the company, to be exercised by the proposed transferee of the shares, ie a right the shareholder transferor gives to the proposed transferee of the shares to purchase the

This Q&A assumes that the personal representative is acting under a general power of attorney made under section 10 of the Power of Attorney Act 1971. Under Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987, SI 1987/2024, r 31), a person entitled to a grant of probate or letters of administration may appoint an attorney to take a grant for their use and benefit. If they do, then any grant to that attorney will be limited until further administration be granted, or in such other way as the district judge or registrar may direct. Once granted and subject to any limitation contained in the grant the attorney as administrator has the same duties and obligations as any other personal representative, unless and

The petitioning creditor must arrange for and effect service of the bankruptcy petition and supporting documents on the debtor (by way of personal service, unless an application for substituted service is successfully made to the court) and ensure that service of the bankruptcy petition is effected at least 14 days before the hearing. For further information, see: section 268 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024, r 10.2, and Practice Direction on Insolvency Proceedings, para 12.7. There is therefore an obligation on the petitioning creditor to serve a petition on the debtor to give them at least 14 days notice of the hearing, which is now in the public domain. The debtor then has an opportunity to respond prior to the

Once the executors are on notice of a claim or potential claim they must not do anything to prejudice that claim (Re Ralphs) and they should adopt a neutral approach in respect of the claim. The claimant should therefore bring or notify the executors of the claim as soon as possible. The following extract is taken from: The terms of the protecting provisions: Inheritance Act Claims 12[2A]: ‘The moral for the claimant is to bring or notify the claim as soon as possible either before or after the grant. Once that is done the personal representative is on notice and should not make any prejudicial distribution. But, as the crucial word is “prejudicial”, a distribution which could not be so described would be permissible. This approach also avoids unnecessary applications under s 5 for interim orders. Once personal representatives have notice of a claim

The answer to this Q&A depends upon which financing structure was employed when the seller acquired the property. See Practice Note: Islamic finance standard documentation in the context of real estate finance transactions for an explanation of the most common structures. You may also find HM Land Registry Practice Guide 69 Islamic finance helpful. If the lending structure is the ‘Ijara wa Iqtina’ or

How did the parties conclude their pre-action settlement? The parties will have entered into a contract by any of the following methods: • by executed agreement in a contractual document • by deed • by exchange of emails or letters • by offer and acceptance under CPR 36 (a pre-action Part 36 offer) For further guidance on enforcement of an agreement made in an exchange of correspondence, see Practice Note: Enforcing a settlement agreement concluded pre-action. When will the Part 8 procedure be appropriate? Part 8 is generally used for resolving claims that do not involve a substantial dispute of fact (CPR 8.1(2)).