In the majority of cases, a winding-up petition is issued by a creditor of the company under section 122(1)(f) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) on the basis that the company is unable to pay its debts, but there are other circumstances where a winding-up petition can be issued. For further reading, see Practice Note: Compulsory liquidation—issuing a petition. Under the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA 2020), restrictions are placed on winding-up petitions. CIGA 2020 creates a new, additional condition that the creditor must, in general terms, additionally be able to demonstrate that it has reasonable grounds for believing that coronavirus (COVID-19) has not had a financial effect on the debtor company, or the debtor company would have been insolvent even

IP analysis: This case is essentially an invention entitlement dispute by an inventor (Dr. Hill), where the precise timing of the invention was key. This was because a service agreement between her and the defendants (Touchlight) allegedly operated to assign only part of her rights, with the residue being infringed by the defendant. While the inventor relied heavily on her own testimony to advance her case, a large number of contemporaneous documents also existed. In dismissing the claim, the court engaged in a close analysis of the documents including presentations, emails and draft patents to determine the invention timing issue. The case shows that in such an analysis what is not disclosed in a document, and the context and the motivations of its author, can be as important as the words themselves. It compared the implications of these from the extensive fact evidence from the inventor, finding the latter lacked all credibility. The court also analysed the service agreement and associated documents to construe the extent of the assignment. This shows how the ‘natural and ordinary meaning’ of the clause is generally the starting point for construction. Written by Sam Fisher, associate at CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP.

Under the Working Time Regulations 1998 (WTR 1998), SI 1998/1833, a worker is entitled to 5.6 weeks’ paid holiday a year (WTR 1998, SI 1998/1833, regs 13, 13A, 16). WTR 1998, SI 1998/1833, reg 16 provides that sections 221–224 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996) apply for the purposes of calculating a week's pay for each week of leave. For information on the right to paid holiday generally, see Practice Notes: Holiday, and Holiday pay. It has been said that the person who drafted ERA 1996, ss 221–224 did not have in mind workers with no irregular working hours, or those who have no guaranteed working hours, such as those on zero hours contracts. Applying those provisions may therefore lead to certain anomalies, such as giving a zero-hours or ‘part-year’ worker (ie one who works for varying hours during only certain weeks of the year, but has a continuing

In loco parentis describes a situation where an individual or institution assumes parental responsibility for a child or young person without being their biological or legal parent. The person or body stands “in the place of a parent” and is expected to exercise parental care, supervision and decision‑making to a reasonable standard.In UK and Irish legal practice, it is a descriptive common law concept rather than a tightly defined statutory term. It appears in case law and is relevant in areas such as education law (duties of schools and universities), tort/negligence (duty of care to pupils or vulnerable persons), family law, child protection and employment law (for staff working with children).Key features typically include day‑to‑day control, acceptance of responsibility, and the child’s dependence on the person or organisation during a particular period or context (for example, during school hours or on a school trip). The scope and intensity of the duty vary with the child’s age, circumstances and the setting.Usage is broadly consistent across England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, though the precise duties and standards of care are developed through each jurisdiction’s case law and statutory frameworks.

STOP PRESS: From 6 April 2017, the Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925 were revoked and replaced by the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024. The content in this Q&A may have been affected by this change. Transactions at undervalue (TUV) The reason that a nominal amount is often attributed to business leases on a business sale is that this reflects their market value. A commercial rent is usually payable on such leases and so there is no intrinsic value in the lease. This contrasts with the position of a long leasehold interest where there may be some value in the asset. The sale of an asset at an undervalue will only be an issue from the perspective of a transactions at undervalue (TUV) claim if the selling company was insolvent at the time of the transaction, and the company

Cost management and possession proceedings This Q&A assumes that the reference to ‘summary judgment is not applicable’ is not a reference to the claim being a possession claim under CPR 55. Such claims are not subject to cost budgeting because they attract fixed costs, and so are excluded from the cost management rules under CPR 3.12(1)(d). For further guidance, see Practice Note: Fixed costs—land claims. Cost management and other types of Part 7 claims Not only is it unusual

Under the well-known doctrine of privity of contract, the terms of a contract can only be enforced either by or against someone who is a party to the contract and not by or against a third party, see our Practice Note: Contracts and third party rights. Strict application of the rule can give rise to harsh results and the courts have developed a number of ways around it. Collateral contracts have proven to be a useful device for circumventing the privity rule in order to create rights or obligations in relation to third parties. The attached extract from Goode: Consumer Credit

The threshold criteria is set out in section 31(2) of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) and provides that a court may only make a care or supervision order if it is satisfied that: • the child concerned is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm, and • the harm, or likelihood of harm, is attributable to the care given to the child, or likely to be given to it, if a care or supervision order were not made, the care not being such as it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give, or the child being beyond parental control See Practice Note: Public children—threshold criteria. Where an application has been made for a care or supervision order, a local authority may only withdraw

Formal creditors’ committees are often formed in large or complex formal insolvencies including in administrations and are often consulted by the relevant office holder on key issues as they provide a useful sounding board. Generally, there will be between three and five members in a committee, usually consisting of the creditors with the largest exposure to the company and so have the greatest interest in the conduct of the insolvency proceedings. Each member of the committee has one vote and an odd number of committee members is usually chosen to avoid any deadlock on voting. If

Consideration has only been given to the inheritance tax implications of a variation for the purposes of this Q&A. For the basic requirements of a variation to benefit from section 142 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984), see: IHTA 1984, s 142 and Practice Note: Variation of Will or intestacy after death. One of the requirements of IHTA 1984, s 142 is that the variation must be made by ‘the persons or any of the persons who benefit or would benefit under the dispositions’ [that is, the dispositions effected by the Will (or on intestacy or otherwise), see: IHTA 1984, s 142(1)(a)].

We direct you to section 33 of the Deregulation Act 2015 (DA 2015) which indicates that if all elements of DA 2015, s 33 are met, a section 21 notice will be invalid. Please note however, the

In recognition of the fact that many older people may sell their family home in order to move to a smaller or residential care home or to fund nursing care, the initial provisions in Finance Act 2015 were augmented in Finance Act 2016 with measures to compensate for the potential loss of available residence nil rate band (RNRB) on downsizing. It applies to those who have downsized or sold their homes on or after 8 July 2015. In essence the RNRB remains available to set against the original higher value of the qualifying former residential interest (QFRI) provided that the proceeds