The EU Regulation on insolvency proceedings, as it has effect in the law of the UK, does apply here; the retained version of the EU Recast Regulation on Insolvency (now known as the Assimilated Recast Regulation on insolvency) continues to apply post-Brexit, as confirmed by the Insolvency (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/146. In terms of whether these proceedings will be COMI proceedings or establishment proceedings, it depends on the location of the company's centre of main interests (COMI) and/or establishment. Post Brexit, the Assimilated Recast Regulation on Insolvency, Art 3 defines COMI for corporates as follows: • the centre of main interests shall be the place where the debtor conducts the administration of its interests on a regular basis and which is ascertainable by third parties • in

It has been assumed that this Q&A refers to validly created licences and individual IP right licence requirements (ie whether must be in writing and signed etc) have not been covered. As such in conducting our research, we have focused on IP licence agreements in which royalties are payable. There are many different types of UK IP licence. Such licences are governed by IP right specific laws such as the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, the Patents Act 1977 or the Trade Marks Act 1994. Technology transfer licensing is subject to UK and EU competition laws. Licences are also governed by common law. A perpetual licence may be granted (and the payment of royalties tied to the term of the licence). However, the period of the licence cannot extend the duration of the underlying IP right (for example for copyright this is the life

Summary Under Civil Procedure Rules 1998, SI 1998/3132, the general approach is that witness statements may only be filed and served with the court’s permission (CPR 32.4(2)). There is no rule permitting the filing and service of witness statements in the accelerated possession procedure. Thus, even though there is nothing to prevent the filing and service of a witness statement, any such witness statement will not have the court’s permission and may be ignored. In any event, it is unlikely that a witness statement from the claimant in response to the defence will assist the claimant to obtain a possession order without a hearing. Explanation Accelerated possession proceedings apply to properties let on an assured shorthold tenancy, provided the conditions specified in CPR 55.12(1) are satisfied. Principally, there must be a written tenancy agreement and notice must have been given under section 21 of the Housing

Rectification Two common mistakes made in the preparation of a Will are mistakes in the names of beneficiaries and wrong arithmetical computations, such as incorrect percentages or, as here, mistaken portions when the estate is left to multiple beneficiaries. In such circumstances, application needs to be made to court for rectification of the Will. This power is contained in section 20 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982 (AJA 1982). This applies where a Will is so expressed that it fails to carry out the testator’s intentions, in consequence of— • a clerical error, or • a failure to understand the testator’s instructions The court then has a discretion to order that the Will shall be rectified so as to carry out the testator’s intentions. AJA 1982, s 20, requires the court to consider three questions

There is no rule requiring a claim to be served on the same person twice, merely because that person is a defendant to the claim in two capacities. The claim form should refer to the single defendant as being sued both personally and as executor of the deceased. In

The rationale is that a buyer with a special interest may be prepared to put in a higher bid which would inflate the market value. Whether this benefits the buyer or the seller (or

Where an agreement with an individual contracting as an independent contractor (consultancy or contractor agreement) contains an indemnity in respect of any statutory employment claims the individual might bring against the company based on employee or worker status, the effectiveness of that indemnity may be limited in two ways, as set out eg in the drafting notes to clause 9.2 of Precedent: Consultancy agreement—company and individual—pro-client. Prohibition on contracting out The first is that, in relation to claims relating to the individual’s statutory rights as an employee, if the substance and not the form of the clause is considered, the indemnity could be considered void as a result of the prohibition on contracting out, eg in section 203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996). For more information on contracting out provisions generally, see the section

There is no requirement that all issues in a claim must be decided by reference to the same system of law. In very many cases, the court must apply one system of law to one set of issues and a different law to others. This situation very often arises, for example, where the issue is whether an act—such as agreement to a contract—purportedly done on behalf of a company, was authorised. Questions of actual authority will generally be decided by reference to the law of the country of the company’s incorporation. The question of the validity of a purported contract is generally decided by reference to the putative law of the contract. This may include questions of apparent authority. This can lead to multiple

Where an application for an order under section 4 of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (I(PFD)A 1975) is made, it is up to the claimant to initiate proceedings and to satisfy the court as to why permission should be granted (see Re Dennis (deceased)). As a result, there is no requirement for the defendant to respond to the limitation issue when serving their acknowledgement of service and written evidence. The claim must not, except with the permission of the court, be made after the end of the period of six months from the date on which representation with respect to the estate of the deceased is first taken out. The provisions of the I(PFD)A 1975 do

Under the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993), a ‘qualifying tenant’ may serve a notice (a ‘section 42 notice’) on their landlord(s) to extend their lease by the addition of 90 years to the unexpired term. Where a ‘qualifying tenant’ of a flat has given a section 42 notice, LRHUDA 1993, s 44 allows the landlord to have a right of access to the flat to which the application relates for the purpose

This Q&A deals with two issues: • whether or not an application for adverse possession of registered land which is subject to a trust may proceed in accordance with paragraph 188(2) (f) of the Land Registration Rules 2003 SI 2003/1417 (LRR 2003), and • whether the application can proceed if the registration into title of a trust is in error Paragraph 188(2)(f) of the Rule LRR 2003, s 188(2) (f) provides that in an application for adverse possession the applicant must confirm that the land is not subject to a trust . An application made for registration based

TOLATA proceedings The Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA 1996) deals with property where multiple parties have an interest. An application under TOLATA 1996, s 14 may be made by a trustee of land or a beneficiary with an interest in property subject to a trust of land. The court has a broad discretionary range of powers to make orders regarding the exercise of the trustees’ functions or to the nature and extent of beneficiaries’ interests, including a sale or postponement of sale. For further information, see: • Cohabitant property rights—overview (this provides general information on TOLATA 1996) • Practice Note: Eligibility to apply under TOLATA 1996 (sets out who is considered to have an interest in property) As part of an application for sale, TOLATA 1996, s 15 sets out the matters the court is to have regard. An