This Q&A considers how a defendant should respond to receiving proceedings for which the claimant was required to, but did not, obtain the court's permission. The requirement for permission Under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) the court's permission is required before a claim form in certain proceedings in the jurisdiction of England and Wales may be served outside the jurisdiction. Exceptions to this are set out in CPR 6.32 and CPR 6.33. Where permission is required, the grounds for seeking permission are set out at CPR 6.37 and CPR PD 6B, para 3.1. The purpose of requiring the court’s permission is that it provides the court with the ability to consider at an early stage whether it has jurisdiction to determine the dispute between the parties, and if it does, whether it is appropriate for the proceedings to be heard by the

Rules governing Part 7 and Part 8 claims In answer to this question, it is first important to note that when issuing a Part 8 claim a number of the Civil Procedure Rules for Part 7 claims apply equally to Part 8 claims. This is set out in CPR PD 8A, para 4.1 which provides that: ‘Part 7 and Practice Direction 7A contain a number of rules and directions applicable to all claims, including those to which Part 8 applies. Those rules and directions should be applied where appropriate.’ For

We have assumed that the question is based on the claim form being served in the UK. The first point to note is that a solicitor who is on the record for a defendant is simply acting for that defendant, it does not mean that the solicitor has authority to accept service of the claim form. Generally the claim form is served on the defendant. The relevant provisions which need to be considered are set out in CPR 6.5(1): • where required by a CPR Part, any other enactment, practice direction or court order, the claim form must be  served on the defendant

We have assumed that the lease is not registered or is old, as it is unlikely to have passed HM Land Registry stringent plan requirements. For a discussion around boundary issues, Practice Note: Property boundaries provides a useful starting point. In particular, if there is a discrepancy between the extent of the site shown on the plans and the description of the site in words: • ‘more particularly described on the plan attached’ means the plan takes precedence over the words • ‘for the purpose of identification only’ means the words take precedence over the plan Plan requirements Practice

A lease must be in respect of a specific piece of property. It is the parcels clause which sets it out. Where a lease is granted after 19 June 2006 for a term of more than seven years, such that it is a prescribed clauses lease, it must contain a full description of the land being leased . Many leases define the property which is to be demised by reference to a plan. The Land Registration Rules 1925, SI 1925/1093 required the use of an ordinance survey plan (although that would not always be possible where a demise was a part of a building). The Land Registration Rules 2003 (LRR 2003), SI 2003/1417 contain no such provision, although there is detailed Practice Guidance on the Land Registry website as to what it expects of plans (see, in particular: PG40s2 Guidance for preparing plans for Land Registry applications). Identifying what has been demised is a question of construing

Background Section 55(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) defines what is 'development'. Only 'development' requires planning permission. It states: '“development,” means the carrying out of building, engineering, mining or other operations in, on, over or under land, or the making of any material change in the use of any buildings or other land.' According to TCPA 1990, s 55(2)(f), the following is not development: ‘The following operations or uses of land shall not be taken for the purposes of this Act to involve development of the land— ... (f) in the case of buildings or other land which are used for a purpose of any class specified in an order made by the Secretary of State under this section, the use of the buildings or other land or, subject to the provisions of the order, of any part of the buildings or the other land, for any other purpose

In general, if a donor revokes a lasting power of attorney (LPA), it will be a revocation of all of the appointments with the LPA instrument, but a donor may if they wish, revoke the appointment of one of several attorneys, provided they have capacity to do so, by executing a partial deed of revocation. The attorney

If the donor under an Enduring Power of Attorney (EPA) loses mental capacity, the EPA is not automatically revoked, as would be the case for an ordinary power of attorney. However, the attorney under an EPA is under a duty to register the EPA when the onset of mental incapacity begins. Once the application for registration

An employee may claim a statutory redundancy payment without being dismissed in one of two situations: • where the employee is ‘laid-off’ by the employer, ie when the employer temporarily shuts down its operation because it cannot find any or enough work for the employees • where an employee is put on short-time working—short-time working occurs where the employer requires the employee to do less than their full contractual hours and the employee receives less pay as a result It would seem that, in this query, the employer intends to implement a period of short-time working. Where there is no existing contractual right for the employer to impose this, the express informed consent of the employee will be needed. The imposition of a period of short-term working without a contractual right to do so, or without the employee’s consent, is

A worker is entitled to a redundancy payment when: • he or she is an employee • they have been continuously employed for not less than two years • they have been dismissed • the dismissal was by reason of redundancy The definition of dismissal for the purposes of entitlement to a redundancy payment is similar to the definition of dismissal used for unfair dismissal, and includes circumstances where an employer terminates the contract with or without notice. To establish whether or not a dismissal was by reason of redundancy, one would need to consider the definition of redundancy

The mere act of a company going into administration does not render a post-termination restriction (also known as a restrictive covenant) unenforceable. Consideration will need to be given to: • the circumstances in which a post-termination restriction becomes unenforceable, and • the effect of administration on the contract of employment Effect of repudiatory breach A repudiatory breach of contract by the employer will usually result in the employer being unable to rely on any post-termination restrictions (Billposting Co Ltd v Atkinson, Cantor Fitzgerald v Bird). However, there will be no repudiatory breach or wrongful dismissal where the terms of the contract expressly permit the employer to give pay in lieu of notice rather than allowing the employee to work their notice, and the employer dismisses in accordance with those contractual terms (Stewart (Rex) Jeffries Parker Ginsberg v Parker). For more information, see: • Practice Note: Post-termination restrictions—the

A provider must ensure that funds from an employer’s apprenticeship service account or government-employer co-investment are only used for eligible costs related to the individual apprenticeship, up to the funding band maximum (see paragraph 103 of the Apprenticeship funding rules 2024 to 2025. Ineligible costs include: • fees to awarding bodies for non-mandatory qualifications, including registration, examination, certification and re-sit costs • additional learning required to re-sit an exam linked to a non-mandatory qualification • re-sit