This Q&A assumes that the estate of the testatrix includes a qualifying residential interest (QRI). For the purposes of calculating the residentail nil rate band (RNRB), where a QRI is left as part of the residue of an estate, HMRC treat each of the residuary legatees as inheriting a proportion of the property.

Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) are governed primarily by Part 2 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004) (HA 2004, ss 55–78). HA 2004, Pt 1 (HA 2004, ss 1–54) also contains provision for the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) which enables the local authority to assess housing conditions and enforce standards. The Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation (England) Regulations 2006, SI 2006/372, govern the general management of HMOs. If a HMO meets certain standards (occupied by five or more people living in two or more households) a licence must be obtained by the person managing or controlling it, which will ordinarily be the landlord or their agent. See Practice Note: Houses in multiple occupation (HMOs)—applying for a licence. There must be an

In theory, a housing disrepair case could be issued in the small claims track for a value of £1.00 or less. There is no lower limit applied to the small claims track other than that which common sense might prompt a client to apply. CPR 26.6 states that the small claims track is suitable for any claim by a tenant of a residential premises against a landlord where the tenant is seeking an order requiring the landlord to carry out repairs, or other work to the premises, where the cost of the repairs or other work to the premises is estimated to be 'not more than £1,000'. No lower

Are success fees recoverable? For conditional fee arrangements (CFAs) entered into prior to 1 April 2013, success fees were recoverable from the other party as were the premiums for any after the event (ATE) insurance policies which were taken out. However, the position changed on 1 April 2013 such that for CFAs and ATE insurance entered into on or after that date the success fee or insurance premium was no longer recoverable. This meant that if successful, the party entering into the CFA or taking out ATE insurance was liable to pay any success fees or insurance premium themselves. This change was introduced by the coming into force of provisions in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO 2012). Importantly, insolvency proceedings were exempt from these provisions in LASPO 2012 and transitional arrangements under CPR 48.1

We refer you to insolvency legislation which provides guidance on this matter: • where the Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925 (IR 1986) apply, IR 1986, SI 1986/1925, r 7.8 provides that if the applicant intends to rely at the first hearing on evidence in a witness statement, they shall file and serve

When the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 applies, the rights of the insured (ie the ‘relevant person’) are automatically transferred to the third party upon the insolvency of the insured through a statutory transfer. It does not create new substantive rights but transfers

In relation to extensions of time under section 29 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) generally, see Practice Note: Time limits and extension of statutory period under LTA 1954. The ‘landlord’ under the LTA 1954 is the legal owner of the property, and for the purposes

Where a business lease is renewed, what will the terms of the new lease be? In the circumstances described in this Q&A (proposed amendments to an indemnity clause), section 35 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) applies as it is concerned with ‘other terms’ under the new tenancy (other than duration and rent). See Lexis® PSL Property Practice Note: LTA 1954—terms of the renewal lease which states that where the parties cannot agree the terms of the lease, the court will make an order as to those terms under LTA 1954, s 35 (other than duration and rent) having regard to: • the terms of the current lease • all other relevant circumstances including the operation of the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants)

In lieu means “instead of” or “in substitution for” something that would otherwise be due under a legal right or obligation. In UK and Irish legal practice it is a descriptive expression, not generally a defined term, and appears across many contexts (for example, “payment in lieu”, “benefit in lieu”, “in lieu of notice”, “in lieu of arrestment”, “in lieu of dower/legitim/portio debita”). In employment law, a “payment in lieu of notice” (PILON) is a sum paid instead of requiring the employee to work their notice period. Its availability and tax treatment depend on contract terms and applicable statutory rules. In property and commercial law, a party may accept money or some other consideration “in lieu” of performance, damages, or specific rights (for instance, a sum in lieu of reinstatement, or compensation in lieu of an easement). Courts will examine the parties’ agreement and the surrounding legal framework to determine whether the substitution is valid and what rights are waived or preserved. Usage and legal effect of “in lieu” are broadly consistent across England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, with differences arising from the specific underlying doctrine or statute.

On the facts of this case the rule put forward by the court, in explaining art 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (right to privacy), is that if a person used his employer’s business messaging service for personal use and it is a condition brought home to the employee beforehand, that the service can only used for business use then the employer may rely upon that fact (that the employee has misused the business messaging service for personal reasons) for disciplinary purposes against the employee. However, it is not clear to what extent (if any) the content of the messages may be relied upon and neither is it clear whether the right on the part of the employer to use the messages concerned as evidence extends to proving any

This Q&A assumes that this is limited to the law in England and Wales. The decisions in R (on the application of A) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (A) and R (on the application of Timson) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Timson) clarify the approach to be taken by courts when asked to rule on the lawfulness of the contents of policies or statements of practice issued by public bodies. Public bodies, including government departments, invariably maintain policies to guide their decision-making in particular cases. It has long been established that it is lawful to have a policy to guide decision-makers, for example, as to how a discretion is to be exercised, so long as the policy is not a fetter on discretion or applied inflexibly. In short, it is lawful to have and apply a policy or statement of practice as long

The European Succession Regulation No. 650/2012 (known as 'Brussels IV') is a European regulation designed to simplify succession planning where there is an international aspect to the estate. It applies to the estates of anyone who dies after 17 August 2015 in any EU state except for Denmark, Ireland and the UK, who have each opted out. The fact of the opt-out does not however mean that Brussels IV is irrelevant to UK succession