This Q&A covers the situation in which a business is converting from a sole trader to a private company limited by shares. For other types of corporate and non-corporate structures, see our Lexis+® UK Corporate Forms of business vehicle subtopic. A sole trader is a person carrying on business in his or her personal capacity and has to comply with very few formalities in order to carry on the business, including having no obligation to publicly disclose any information. A company is a separate legal entity, distinct from its members. It is owned by its members (also known as shareholders) and it is managed by its directors. It is regulated by the Companies Act 20006 (CA 2006).

See the following Q&As: • A Section 21 Notice in relation to an AST is addressed to only one of the two tenants named on the tenancy agreement. Is service on one joint tenant sufficient to commence court action? • Does a section 21 notice under the Housing Act 1988 need to be given to all joint tenants of an assured shorthold tenancy? • Where there is a joint tenancy and only one of the tenants is convicted of a serious offence at the property, must the landlord serve a section 8 notice using ground 7A on both joint tenants? Section 21(4) of the Housing Act 1988 (HA 1988) provides: ‘Without prejudice

For the purposes of this Q&A, it is assumed that the Portal referred to is the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents (RTA Protocol) from 31 July 2013 Portal and the associated CPR PD 8B. The RTA Protocol does not expressly set out the consequences of a failure to respond to a head of loss. However, the following paragraph are helpful in interpreting the likely outcome: ‘7.38 Within the initial consideration period (or any extension agreed under paragraph 7.36) the defendant must either accept the offer made by the claimant on the Stage 2 Settlement Pack Form or make a counter-offer using that form.’ (our emphasis in bold) The RTA Protocol envisages that a defendant will either accept the offer or make a counter-offer during the Stage 2 process. A failure to respond to the claimant’s offer is likely to be construed as a party

Part 47 The court will usually summarily assess the costs associated with the detailed assessment at the conclusion of those proceedings (CPR 47.20(5)). Before and during the course of detailed assessment it is open to either party to make an offer to settle or to initiate settlement negotiations. Reaching a settlement saves the time and cost of detailed assessment proceedings. When considering settlement in detailed assessment proceedings, the relevant CPR provisions are found in CPR 47.20(4) which provides that the

Where an individual purchases a property in circumstances where they are subject to the higher 3% rates but then subsequently sells their old main residence, then they are able to reclaim the higher 3% rates paid using the payment request form within 12 months of the sale of the old main residence, or 12 months of the filing date of the stamp duty land tax (SDLT) return for the new main residence. See Practice Note: Higher rates of SDLT on additional residential properties. The question asks whether, in circumstances where the individual

Nuisance is an action (or sometimes a failure to act) by the defendant which causes an interference with the claimant's reasonable enjoyment of his land or which unduly interferes with the claimant's enjoyment of his land. A reference to nuisance (ie if 'public' or 'statutory' is not specified) will usually mean private nuisance. A public nuisance is: • one which 'materially affects the reasonable comfort and convenience of life of a class of Her Majesty's subjects. The sphere of the nuisance may be described generally as ‘the neighbourhood’; but the question whether the local community within that sphere comprises a sufficient number of persons to constitute a class of the public is a question of fact in every case. It is

Firstly, consideration should be given to the statutory restrictions under section 6 of the Criminal Law Act 1977 (CLA 1977) which provides that it is a criminal offence to threaten or use force to gain entry when someone is physically at the premises and opposes re-entry. CPR 83.26(1) states: ‘A judgment or order for the recovery of land will be enforceable by warrant of possession.’ While on its face, CPR 83.26(1) does not explicitly go as far as saying that an order for the recovery of land can only be enforceable by warrant of possession,

Conditional Fee Agreements statutory framework Conditional Fee Agreements (CFAs) are subject to specific requirements which are set out in Practice Note: Conditional fee agreements—definition and requirements.  It will be seen from this, that the statutory framework is that set out in the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 which specifically defines ‘advocacy services’ in s 119 as: 'any services which it would be reasonable to expect a person who is exercising, or contemplating exercising, a right of audience in relation to any proceedings, or contemplated proceedings, to provide.' We

It is not clear from the question why it is proposed that the contractor’s parent company should enter into the bond instead of, or as well as, the contractor. Whether this is an advisable course of action may depend on the particular circumstances, the demands of the guarantor/employer and financial stability of the contractor etc. However, in our experience, it is certainly not common. We envisage that the reason it is being considered may be because the parent company is going to pay for the bond, rather than the contractor. If this is the case, it does not seem essential for the parent company to be party to the bond in order to pay for it (just as, where it is paying, the contractor

During the lifetime of the testator they will enter into obligations in respect of contracts, covenants, debts, duties etc. Generally these obligations will subsist after their death and while their personal representative (PR) will not be a party to those matters, those obligations can remain enforceable against the estate in the hands of the PR. Multiple methods of enforcement Judgment creditors can, if they wish (and can afford it) execute their judgment by using one or several enforcement methods at once (some methods are mutually exclusive). The available options are set out in CPR 70. For further information, see Practice Note: Which enforcement of judgment method should I choose? CPR 70.2 states that: ‘(1) Practice Direction 70 sets out methods of enforcing judgments or orders for the payment of money. (2) A judgment creditor may,

If the section 8 notice did not also contain grounds 10 and/or 11 then a landlord cannot rely on those grounds and issue possession proceedings based on those grounds. A new notice would need to be served setting out the grounds. It

If the landlord spots a mistake in a notice before it expires, a further notice may be served without prejudice to the validity of the first—although depending when the mistake is spotted, this is likely to impact on the date which can be specified in the further notice. If the notice has already expired and the tenant has already vacated on the basis of the notice served, the landlord should consider whether: • there may be any argument that the error is one which may be saved by the Mannai principle—see Practice Note: Break clauses and notices—exercising breaks and conditions precedent, in particular section: Mannai—statutory notices • the recipient of the notice has made any representations as to its validity. If so, there may be scope to argue that the recipient has impliedly waived the invalidities in the notice or that potentially they are estopped from