Firstly, the capital gains tax (CGT) relief is only in respect of the disposal of shares originally awarded with an unrestricted market value at acquisition of up to £50,000. Where this is the case, and all other ESS requirements have been fulfilled (see Practice Note: Employee shareholder shares—shares

A UK VAT registered seller of shares will normally incur VAT on the costs associated with that sale, for instance on the fees of advisers such as accountants and lawyers. Under the general rule in section 26(2) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (VATA 1994), VAT incurred in the course of a business is recoverable if it is attributable to: • taxable supplies, or supplies that would be taxable if made in the UK, or • certain other supplies that are specified for this purpose by the Value Added Tax (Input Tax) (Specified Supplies) Order, SI 1999/3121 (specified supplies) A sale of shares is an exempt supply for VAT purposes. Therefore VAT that is attributable to a share sale will not be recoverable under the first of these heads (because it is not attributable to a taxable supply, or a supply that would be taxable if made in the UK). The question is

CDD requirements underpin the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (MLR 2017), SI 2017/692, as amended. Where the MLR 2017, SI 2017/692 applies, conducting CDD is an absolute requirement. It is not in itself subject to the risk-based approach. Certain components of CDD however, allow for flexibility and positively require risk assessment. You should determine the risk posed by a client or category of clients as part of your CDD measures and your anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing (CTF) systems and controls generally. Section CDD measures sets out suggested CDD for non-face-to-face clients. Non-face-to-face clients When assessing whether there is a high risk of money laundering or terrorist financing in a particular situation, one factor which increases the risk posed by an individual is if the situation involves non-face-to-face business relationships or transactions, without certain safeguards, such as an electronic identification process which meets the conditions set out in the MLR 2017,

For the purposes of determining whether paragraph 11 of Schedule 9 to the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) applies, it is first necessary to determine who is a ‘young worker’ and who is an ‘older worker’. For these purposes: • a ‘young worker’ is one who qualifies for the national minimum wage (NMW) at a lower rate that the single hourly rate • an older worker is a person who qualifies for the NMW at a higher rate than that at which the young worker qualifies for it The single hourly rate is the national living wage (NLW) rate, paid to workers aged 21 and over, of £12.21 from 1 April 2025. See

For more detailed information on applicable law, ie the system of law that applies to the contract of employment under consideration, see Practice Note: Applicable law—which system of law applies to the contract or employment relationship. For more detailed information on international jurisdiction, ie whose courts and tribunals should decide the case: • for proceedings instituted before 1 January 2021, see Practice Note: International jurisdiction—allocating employment cases between national courts and tribunals pre-1 January 2021 [Archived] • for proceedings instituted on or after 1 January 2021, see Practice Note: International jurisdiction—the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 in employment

The Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/855, (as amended) impose financial, trade, transport and immigration sanctions to encourage Russia to cease actions which destabilise Ukraine. Various amendments have been made to the Regulations. Current measures include restrictions on dealing with designated persons and certain dealings

Article 22(1) of the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR), Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679 gives data subjects the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects that concern them or similarly significantly affects them. Article 22(1) of the UK GDPR does not apply (ie automated decision making is allowed) in certain specified circumstances, ie the processing is: • necessary for entering into, or performance of, a contract between the data subject and a data controller

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. There are three grounds upon which an individual can apply to annul a bankruptcy order made against him. The two most common grounds are those set out in section 282 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986)—that either: • the bankruptcy order ought not to have been made in the first place, or • the costs, expenses and creditor claims of the bankruptcy have been paid or secured for to the satisfaction of the court The third ground is under IA 1986, s 261, which provides that a bankruptcy shall be annulled by the court where an undischarged bankrupt has had an individual voluntary arrangement (IVA) approved by his creditors. The application to court can either be made by the bankrupt or—if such an application

In answering this Q&A, we refer you to Practice Note: Road traffic—traffic regulation order procedure and notices, and in particular the section Procedure for making a traffic order. This

This Q&A refers to ‘Form C2’ which is an ‘Application: For permission to start proceedings; For an order or directions in existing proceedings; To be joined as, or cease to be, a party in existing family proceedings under the Children Act 1989’. This Q&A relates to private law children proceedings. While the scenario described suggests that the application is for someone other than a McKenzie friend to represent a litigant in person, there is a distinction to be drawn between where a litigant in person exercises their ordinary right of audience with the assistance of a McKenzie friend and where a litigant in person asks that another person (who is not a qualified lawyer with incidental rights of audience) should be allowed to exercise rights of audience on their behalf, who would still be a McKenzie friend. A litigant who is not legally represented has the right to

In this Q&A we have assumed that the claim was correctly issued and was correctly allocated to the small claims track. Thereafter, the value has increased and therefore the value now exceeds £10,000. Allocation to track is dealt with between CPR 26.5 and CPR 26.9. It is a judicial procedure which is undertaken after both parties have filed their directions questionnaires. The directions questionnaire used in the small claims track specifically asks at Part C whether the party agrees that the small claims track is the appropriate track. Failing to specify allocation issues at that time may make any further application for reallocation more difficult for the applicant. CPR 26.6 states that the small claims track is the normal track for cases not

For the purposes of this Q&A, it has been assumed the property is a jointly-owned property where the other beneficial owner remains in occupation and cannot be sold. According to Care and support statutory guidance (the Guidance), a local authority should ensure that people are not charged more than it is reasonably practicable for them to pay. Annex B of the Guidance covers the treatment of capital where a local authority has chosen to charge a person for the services it is arranging and therefore must undertake a financial assessment. In assessing what a person can afford to contribute, a local authority must apply the upper and lower capital limits. The upper capital limit is currently set at £23,250 and the lower capital limit at £14,250