This How to Guide looks at releasing security over land. It discusses: • common scenarios in which security may need to be released • steps to be taken prior to release • the completion process • how the release should be effected This Practice Note discusses the release of security over commercial, rather than residential property in England and Wales and focuses on registered land. It does not cover residential conveyancing practice or the release of mortgages over unregistered land. In this ‘how to’ guide, mortgages and charges over land are referred to as ‘charges’ and the secured party is referred to as the ‘chargee’ and the security provider as the ‘chargor’. When might a charge over land need to be released? Businesses will often grant charges over land as security for a loan. The charge might be the only security or it might be granted as part of a wider security package. Where the borrower is a company, the charge might be included in a debenture, which is an instrument

This short guide sets out the steps to be followed to remove a company director pursuant to section 168 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Removal of a director by ordinary resolution of the members A director may be removed from office at any time by ordinary resolution of the members passed at a general meeting of a company before the expiration of their period of office and notwithstanding anything in any agreement between the director and the company. Special notice of 28 clear days (ie excluding the day on which notice is given and the day of the general meeting) of the proposed ordinary resolution to remove a director is required to be given to the company. Where there is a forthcoming annual general meeting (AGM) a member may give special notice of the proposed resolution to the company timed for inclusion with notice of the meeting. For further information on the procedure for passing an ordinary resolution see Ordinary resolutions in Practice Note: Member resolutions. Specific steps to be followed Step

A personal representative can be removed in a number of non-contentious or contentious ways which are set out below together with a high-level summary of each option. Renunciation An executor may renounce their right to seek a grant of probate in writing, signed, witnessed and lodged at the probate registry (see Practice Note: Removal, renunciation and retirement of personal representatives). It is not possible for an executor to renounce if there has been ‘intermeddling' in the estate (see Practice Note: Intermeddling in an estate). For an administrator (as opposed to an executor), no statement regarding intermeddling is required. A precedent for renouncing administrators can be found at Form PA16. Where an executor does not wish to renounce or take out probate at the relevant time, the proving executors can seek probate with power reserved to that executor as an alternative (see Practice Note: The type of grant needed). Passing over–section 116 Senior Courts Act 1981 Where ‘special circumstances’ make it ‘necessary or expedient’ to replace a person who would have been entitled

This short guide sets out the steps that may be taken to remove or correct a filing at Companies House, how to rectify statutory books and how to report suspicious activity in relation to a company’s filings. Various methods exist within Part 35 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) by which a company can correct or remove a filing at Companies House. The same methods are, with relevant adjustment, extended to LLPs by the Limited Liability Partnerships (Application of Companies Act 2006) Regulations 2009, SI 2009/1804. The relevant forms relating to LLPs can be located on the Companies House website using the same identifiers as noted below for companies but with the prefix ‘LL’, eg LL RP04. For further information on filings at Companies House, see Practice Note: Companies House filings—requirements, process and common issues. Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023—promoting the integrity of the register The Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (ECCTA 2023) contains a number of provisions relating to the integrity of the register at Companies

Regulation 3 of the Reporting on Payment Practices Regulations 2017, SI 2017/395 (the Regulations), requires certain large companies and Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs) (referred to as 'qualifying companies' and 'qualifying LLPs') to prepare and publish information about their payment practices and performance in relation to 'qualifying contracts' twice per financial year on an official website within 30 days of the end of each reporting period. These rules were introduced in response to the much reported problem of smaller, more economically vulnerable suppliers being forced to wait considerable time for payment in return for their goods and services. The corresponding regulations for LLPs are available here. The Department for Business and Trade (DBT), has issued guidance (the Guidance) to assist relevant businesses to meet their reporting requirements. Definition of a qualifying company or LLP From 6 April 2025, the qualifying conditions of a company or LLP are met in a financial year in which it satisfies two or more of the following 'general thresholds': • turnover over £54m (up from £36m) • balance sheet

IP analysis: There has been a noted increase in the number of websites offering reduced-price software, that is seemingly genuine but is not. The downloading, accessing and/or use of pirated software is illegal, and perpetrators can face not only civil liability but also criminal prosecution. Where that wrongdoing is carried out by an employee in the course of their employment, the employer can be held liable for the employee’s actions. Software companies can now identify with increasing accuracy when pirated software has been used, and by whom, by their IP address. It is not uncommon, therefore, for an employer to receive a Letter Before Claim alleging wrongdoing on the part of one of its employees, threatening legal proceedings against the employer if demands for financial compensation are not met. In this article, Partner Will Charlesworth from Keystone Law considers what the legal basis is for such a claim against an employer, the potential available remedies and defence, how to resolve the claim before it escalates, and what immediate steps should be taken on receipt of a Letter Before Claim.

This Practice Note reminds practitioners about important steps to take when responding to a confiscation statement, which is the statement issued by a prosecutor pursuant to section 16 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002). Confiscation statement under POCA 2002 Ordinarily, the defence will have provided a statement of means pursuant to POCA 2002, s 18 prior to the prosecutor serving a Statement of Information pursuant to POCA 2002, s 16 (also known as a section 16 statement). See: Confiscation timetable—checklist. The defence then have the opportunity to respond to the section 16 statement under POCA 2002, s 17. The purpose of the response is to narrow the issues to be litigated at the confiscation hearing. Failure to indicate whether the defence takes issue with any of the points made by the prosecution in its section 16 statement may be taken by the court to be an acceptance by the defence of those certain points raised. It is therefore important that the section 16 statement

This Practice Note is a ‘how to’ guide providing practical guidance on responding to a freedom of information (FOI) request, focusing on requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000). Both FIA 2000 and the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR 2004), SI 2004/3391 provide a right of access to recorded information held by public authorities. This guide focuses on FIA 2000. For further reading on EIR 2004, see: Environmental information—overview. This guide does not cover the various grounds for refusing an FOI request or withholding information. For details, see Practice Notes: Absolute exemptions to a freedom of information request and Qualified exemptions to a freedom of information request. Key legislation and guidance This guide should be read in conjunction with the following legislation, code of practice, and guidance from the Information Commission’s Office (ICO): • FIA 2000 • Freedom of Information Code of Practice • ICO—Guide to dealing with an FOI request • ICO—Information you hold for the purpose of FOIA • ICO—Requests where the cost

This Practice Note provides a brief summary of the issues you should have in mind when you have received and will need to respond to a letter of claim. For greater detail, as well as links to relevant underlying content, see Practice Note: Responding to a letter of claim—a practical guide. For high level guidance on how to prepare a letter of claim, see Practice Note: How to prepare a letter of claim. Initial considerations Read the letter of claim you have received with a view to determining: • whether the other side appear to have a valid claim—can you make a quick assessment of their legal arguments and/or whether you might have a potential defence (for example, could they be outside of a relevant limitation period)? • what remedies are they seeking—for example, where an interim injunction (or any other form of emergency interim relief) is threatened you would need to deal with the letter of claim more swiftly. The potential value of the alleged claim will also usually influence the steps

Overview This Practice Note provides high-level guidance on responding to a letter of claim in clinical negligence proceedings in England and Wales. A letter of response is the formal pre-action document served pursuant to the Pre-Action Protocol for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes (the Protocol). In clinical negligence litigation, the letter of response: • sets out the defendant’s reasoned position on breach of duty and causation • identifies which issues are admitted and which are disputed • clarifies the expert disciplines relied upon • assists in narrowing the issues prior to proceedings The defendant should acknowledge the letter of claim within 14 days and identify who will be dealing with the matter. The letter of response must be served within four months of receipt of the letter of claim. See Practice Note: The Pre-Action Protocol for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes—6 April 2015 onwards. Initial considerations On receipt of a letter of claim, practitioners should consider: • whether the allegations disclose a viable claim • whether

This Practice Note provides high-level guidance for junior defendant lawyers on how to deal with a personal injury claim in England and Wales from first notification through to investigation, strategy, settlement or early proceedings. It focuses on the practical steps required to protect the defendant’s position on liability, causation, quantum, evidence, costs and settlement. Initial considerations On first notification of a personal injury claim, identify exactly what has been received. This may be a letter of notification, letter of claim, Claim Notification Form, Small Claim Notification Form, portal notification, informal correspondence or issued proceedings. The document received will affect the applicable timetable, procedural route and immediate action required. At the outset, establish: • the claimant’s identity and litigation status, including whether they are a child or protected party • the proposed defendant and insurer • whether proceedings have already been issued • the accident, exposure or injury date • whether limitation is imminent Note who your instructions have come from (insurer client or corporate insured) and check if you

This Practice Note provides a brief summary of the issues to consider when you have received a personal injury letter of claim and need to respond. For high-level guidance on how to prepare a personal injury letter of claim, see Practice Note: How to prepare a personal injury letter of claim. For guidance on responding to a clinical negligence letter of claim, see Practice Note: How to respond to a letter of claim in clinical negligence claims. Initial considerations The letter of claim you have received should be considered with a view to determining: • whether the claimant appears to have a valid claim—can you make an initial assessment of their legal arguments and/or whether there may be a potential defence (for example, whether the claim may fall outside a relevant limitation period) • the potential value of the alleged claim, which will usually influence the steps it is proportionate to take at the pre-action stage • whether the letter of claim complies with any relevant pre-action protocol—note