There does not appear to be a specific rule under the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 or within any of the potentially applicable court guides which requires a party to provide an English translation to a document in these circumstances. However, if a party already has in its possession a translation of a document that is disclosable under the standard disclosure rule at CPR 31.6 then that translation would be disclosable. It would not be protected as being privileged even if the translation was obtained for

This Q&A is based on the assumption that the question is focused on the impact that the disposal of the asset would have on the ability to prove the claim and progress the proceedings through to trial. There are three key areas which could be affected by disposal of the asset: • mitigation of loss • ability to prove the claim, and • actions of the other party Mitigation of loss The extent to which damages may be recoverable for breach of contract is influenced by the following: • the principles of causation and remoteness • the extent to which the claimant has sought to mitigate its loss Even where causation and remoteness have been established (see Practice Note: Causation and remoteness in contractual breach claims) in relation to the loss for which damages are claimed, such damages may yet be reduced if the claimant has failed to mitigate their loss.

Pre-action disclosure The extent of any pre-action disclosure that a client is obliged to make will, in the absence of any order from the court compelling pre-action disclosure, depend on the terms of any pre-action protocol that applies to the dispute. If, for example, the dispute falls within the Pre-Action Protocol for Personal Injury Claims, paragraph 3.10–3.13 as well as Annex B of the protocol will be of relevance. It is arguable that any video surveillance evidence obtained would need to be disclosed as part of enclosures

The answer to this Q&A centres on the definition of an independent legal professional. For the purposes of the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (MLR 2017), SI 2017/692, an independent legal professional is a firm or sole practitioner who by way of business provides legal or notarial services to other persons when participating in (ie assisting in planning or execution of transactions or otherwise acts for or on behalf of a client) financial or real property transactions concerning: • buying and selling of real property or business entities • managing client money (this is narrower than handling it), securities or other assets • opening

What are third party debt orders (TPDO)? A third party debt order (TPDO) is a method of enforcement by which a judgment creditor may enforce a debt against money due and owing to the judgment debtor by a third party who is within the jurisdiction. This includes money held in the judgment debtor's name in a bank or building society or money owed to a self-employed judgment debtor in the course of his trade. The court has a discretion whether to grant a third party debt order and whether they do so will be dependent

A potential claim does not generally become extinguished by the death of the prospective claimant; it is open for it to be brought, or continued, by their personal representatives on behalf of their estate. Whilst there are some specific claims that cannot be pursued after death, the majority of claims will be able to be brought thereafter. Where a Will appoints executors, those executors have conferred upon them by virtue of their appointment the ability to sue on behalf of the estate, as this derives from

Hearings in private As CPR 39.2(1) explicitly states, the general rule is that a hearing is to be in public, but it may be held in private (CPR 39.2(3)). There are a number of factors the court has to consider, including the duty to protect, or have regard to, a right to freedom of expression (CPR 39.2(2)), whether a private hearing is necessary to secure the proper of administration of justice (CPR 39.2(3)), whether there are more proportionate measures that can be taken, and Articles 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The strength of the presumption that hearings should be in public is such that it will not easily be overcome. The party seeking a hearing in private has to be able to satisfy the court that only by ‘nothing short

This Q&A assumes that this relates to a business-to-business arrangement in a general commercial, non-regulated industry. A promise will only be capable of being contractually enforced if it is either made in a deed or made in exchange for something of value, known as 'consideration'. Consideration can be: • executory—where the consideration takes the form of a future act (eg a promise to pay on a certain

MLex: UK banks and insurers received updated climate-risk guidance from the Bank of England’s (BoE) supervisory arm on 30 April 2025, just as the UK government itself was being dressed down for being unprepared to face climate change. The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) stopped well short of imposing binding rules on financial firms, however, meaning calls to go further are set to continue.

‘Reasonable steps’ seems to be determined by the courts based on the specific facts and circumstances of the case. For example, in Goldman v Hargrave at page 663 the Privy Council held that: ‘It is not enough to say merely that these must be "reasonable," since what is reasonable to one man may be very unreasonable, and indeed ruinous, to another… One may say in general terms that the existence of a duty must be based upon knowledge of the hazard, ability

While the estate is being administered, the ownership of the deceased's unadministered assets lies with the personal representatives for the purposes of administration, without any distinction between legal and equitable interests. No beneficiary in the meantime, whether under the deceased's Will or intestacy, has any proprietary interest in any particular asset comprised in the unadministered estate. See Practice Note: Beneficiaries' rights and remedies. The general rules governing capital gains tax (CGT) on

Pursuant to section 20(8) of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) any person with parental responsibility may at any time remove a child from accommodation provided by the local authority. However, this right is subject to two limitations: • firstly, pursuant to ChA 1989, s 20(9) where a child lives with a person under either a child arrangements order or a Special Guardianship Order, or an order under the