Where proceedings have been issued and the parties come to a compromise, they can request that the court make an order by consent disposing of the proceedings. Where the court has the power and jurisdiction to make the order, this results in an enforceable court order in the ordinary way; where the parties wish to compromise without the terms of the agreement amounting to a judgment, or where those terms are matters which a court would not be able to order, they can stay the proceedings on terms set out in a schedule (a Tomlin order). However, if proceedings have not been issued, such steps are not available to the parties as the court is not seized of the matter. Where

When considering the question of capacity to conduct litigation, it must be ascertained whether or not the individual in question is capable of understanding information relevant to the litigation, retaining that information evaluating the information and communicating a decision (Masterman-Lister v Brutton & Co). In civil proceedings, CPR 21 applies where a person lacks capacity to conduct proceedings (see also CPR PD 21), and if proceedings are to be conducted in the County Court, High Court, Family Court or Court of Protection a litigation friend must be appointed to give instructions and otherwise conduct the proceedings on their behalf. As per CPR 21, the test for capacity, which applies only in relation to section 2(1) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005)

The Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR), SI 1998/3132, Pt 21 contains special provisions which apply in proceedings involving children and protected parties. 'Child' means a person under 18 (CPR 21.1(2)(b)). By CPR 21.1, a litigation friend must conduct proceedings on a child’s behalf unless the court makes an order permitting the child to conduct proceedings without one. A person may not, without the court’s permission, make an application against a child before proceedings have started, or take any step in proceedings save for issuing and serving a claim form, or applying for the appointment of a litigation friend, until a litigation friend

Reasonable travel costs incurred in attending treatment sessions or medical appointments are recoverable. If these trips are taken in a family car then the appropriate claim is calculated by reference to the running costs of the vehicle. The AA Motoring Costs currently justify between 17.5p and 30p per mile depending on the value of the vehicle and the type of petrol used (although these rates arguably

The Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993) establishes a statutory scheme under which qualifying leaseholders are able collectively to enfranchise and acquire the freehold of the building which contains their flats. Although not part of the statutory scheme, it has become common practice for those qualifying leaseholders who are participating in the enfranchisement process to enter into a participation agreement. This is an agreement between the nominee purchaser and participating tenants under which each participating tenant agrees to contribute a certain amount to the price and costs of enfranchisement and where the consequences of breach by any party of their obligations thereunder are clearly stated. The agreement usually also sets out the steps that are to be taken during the enfranchisement process. We do not have any materials which deal with nor, more particularly, recommend the use of a

The reversioner to whom the initial notice is addressed is given a wide power to act on behalf of other freeholders and/or intermediate landlords (defined in the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993) as relevant landlords). In particular, any notice which is given to the reversioner is taken to be given or received by them on behalf of the other relevant landlords. The reversioner is able to thereafter act on behalf of the relevant landlords and negotiate and agree the terms of acquisition, execute any conveyance to transfer the interest to the nominee purchaser and bring or defend any proceedings following the service of the initial notice. However, at any time after the service of the reversioner’s counter-notice the other landlords may give notice to the nominated purchaser that they wish to be dealt with directly and to be separately represented in any legal proceedings. In

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: James Barker, barrister at Enterprise Chambers, explores the decision in Dickinson v NAL Realisations Ltd and argues that the law around when directors of a company have to consider the interests of creditors is in a state of evolution.

Track allocation is governed by CPR 26.5–CPR 26.10. For the purposes of this question, it is assumed that specific exclusions in relation to track allocation set out in CPR 26.6(1) in respect of personal injury and landlord and tenant claims do not apply. In relation to allocation, regard should be had to CPR 26.8 ‘Matters relevant to allocation to a track’. This rule sets out nine specific matters to which the court will have regard: ‘(1) When deciding the track for a claim, the matters to which the court shall have regard include— (a) the financial value, if any, of the claim; (b) the nature of the remedy sought; (c) the likely complexity of the facts, law or evidence; (d) the number of parties or likely parties; (e) the value of any counterclaim or other Part 20 claim

This Q&A assumes that the contract to be terminated is between businesses (B2B). For guidance on considerations on the termination of B2C contracts, see Practice Note: Termination and expiry of contracts, in particular section: Termination of business-to-consumer contracts. We are not aware of any equitable principle or case law that specifically takes into account unforeseen circumstances in exercising a right to terminate. Rights to terminate a contract may arise in a variety of circumstances and require exercise in different ways. For example, the right of an innocent party to terminate at common law may arise on the repudiatory breach of the other party. This right may be lost by election or waiver if the innocent party affirms the breach (eg by delaying the exercise of their right

Service of initial details of the prosecution case The Criminal Procedure Rules 2020, SI 2020/759, part 8 (CrimPR), applies in any case (r. 8.1(1)). Rule 8.2(1)(a) requires the prosecutor, as soon as practicable (and, in any event, no later than the beginning of the day of the first hearing), to provide to the court 'initial details' of the prosecution case. These initial details of the prosecution case do not have to be supplied automatically to the accused; rather, r. 8.2(2) provides that, if the accused requests the initial details, the prosecutor has to serve them as soon as practicable (and, in any event, no later than the beginning of the day of the first hearing); if the accused does not request those details, the prosecutor must make them available to the accused at, or before, the beginning of the day of the first hearing (r. 8.2(3)). What

The tilted balance in paragraph 11(d) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) applies where there are no relevant development plan policies, or where the policies which are most important for determining the planning application are out of date, unless certain

If the improvement was carried out by the tenant during the current tenancy then the court will take it into account even if it was carried out more than 21 years ago. If it was not carried out during the current tenancy, then the court will only take it into account if: • the improvements were completed not more than 21 years before the application to the court was made