Workers who make ‘protected disclosures’ (colloquially referred to as ‘whistleblowing’) are protected from dismissal, selection for redundancy or from being made subject to a detriment. For further information, see: Whistleblowing—overview. Rights to bring a whistleblowing claim potentially arise when someone suffers a detriment (which might be dismissal or any other detriment) because they made a protected disclosure. For further information, see Practice Note: Whistleblowing—protected disclosures. A protected disclosure involves a worker making: • a disclosure of information (for further information, see Practice Note: Whistleblowing—protected disclosures—Characteristics of disclosures) • which is a qualifying disclosure, and • is made in one of the protected manners In

We are not aware of any legislative provision requiring a local authority to specify the precise structure to which a section 143 notice relates. Section 320 of the Highways Act 1980 (HiA 1980) sets out general provisions as to the form of notices under HiA 1980, but this simply confirms that such notices which are made or issued by (among others) a local authority must be in writing. The wording of HiA 1980, s 143 appears to make a notice personal to the ‘person having control or possession of the structure’. With this in mind, if a new structure was erected by a person not named on the original notice, it would appear that the notice would not apply to the new structure. For the purposes of the HiA 1980, 'structure'

For information on business property relief generally, see Practice Note: IHT—business property relief. The Q&A alludes to the advice often given to a testator, to leave assets qualifying for business property relief (BPR) to a discretionary trust by their Will. The question can be broken down into two parts: • is a specific legacy of the business property required? • does the recipient of the legacy have to be a discretionary trust? Is a specific legacy required? A specific legacy of the business property is best if the beneficiaries of the deceased’s entire estate passing by the

A third party debt order (TPDO) is a method of enforcement by which a judgment creditor may enforce a debt against money due and owing to the judgment debtor by a third party who is within the jurisdiction. In order to apply for a TPDO, the creditor needs to know whether the debtor owed money from a third party. This information and the timing when it is obtained is crucial to the success of the application because the creditor has to supply evidence to the court in support of their belief that the third party is indebted to the debtor. A third party's liability to the debtor must be certain, therefore the creditor needs to be proactive and obtain as much information as possible. We are however, not aware

What is an individual voluntary agreement (IVA)? An individual voluntary arrangement (IVA) is a mechanism by which a debtor is able to enter into a binding agreement with their creditors (and possibly third parties) for a composition of the debtor's liabilities or a scheme of arrangement of their affairs. The relevant provisions are set out in Part XIII of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986). IVAs are proposed in circumstances where an individual is in financial difficulties, and, often following the presentation or threat of a bankruptcy petition against the debtor, although it is possible for an undischarged bankrupt to propose an IVA (which if approved will allow the bankrupt to apply to have the bankruptcy annulled). Who can propose an IVA? In the majority of cases the debtor proposing a voluntary arrangement will be domiciled

A number of reliefs and exemptions are available from the annual tax on enveloped dwellings (ATED). One such relief is for property rental businesses. Relief is available from ATED where a property is, or steps are being taken to secure that the property will be, let to tenants and is a qualifying property rental business (section 133 of the Finance Act 2013 (FA 2013)). See HMRC ATED Technical Guidance para 31. Qualifying property rental business relief A qualifying property rental business for these purposes is a property business: • as defined in Chapter 2 of Part 4 of the Corporation Tax Act 2009 (CTA 2009), and CTA 2009, Pt 4 • which is run on a commercial basis with a view to profit (FA 2013, ss 133(3)–(6)). See HMRC ATED Technical Guidance para 31. This relief is not available on any day during a chargeable period

A caution against first registration protects interests which affect unregistered land. HM Land Registry must give notice to the cautioner of any application for registration of the legal estate. Section 15 of the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002) governs the legal estates against which such a caution can be registered. A caution has no effect on the validity or priority of any interest of the cautioner but merely requires notice and gives the right to object to any application for first registration. A caution against first registration can be cancelled by application to HM Land Registry in accordance with LRA 2002, s 18(1) and the Land Registration Rules 2003 (LRR 2003), SI 2003/1417, r 45. However, where the caution

We refer you to Practice Note: Confidentiality—a guide for in-house banking and finance lawyers which summarily sets out the law on bankers’ duties of confidentiality at common law as well as other considerations that banks should take into account when dealing with confidential information. In relation to personal information, banks are required to provide a privacy notice

In pari delicto is a Latin expression used when both parties are equally at fault in relation to unlawful, fraudulent, or seriously wrongful conduct. In practice, it most often arises where a claimant seeks a remedy (such as damages, restitution, or contribution) but the court finds the claimant’s own illegality or wrongdoing is as serious as, or greater than, the defendant’s.The phrase is not generally defined in statute; its content and limits are developed mainly through case law. Courts in England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland use the concept when applying illegality defences, equitable principles, and rules on unjust enrichment, contribution and partnership disputes.Key features include: (i) relative blameworthiness – assessing whether the parties are “in equal fault”; (ii) the effect that serious illegality may bar or limit relief; and (iii) policy considerations, including deterrence of illegal transactions and maintaining the integrity of the legal system.Usage is broadly consistent across the UK and Ireland, though the precise formulation and weight given to in pari delicto can differ depending on the local approach to illegality, equity and public policy in each jurisdiction’s appellate case law.

Dealing with the same subject matter.

Pre-action protocols for low value claims (RTA or EL/PL) RTA The protocol applies to all road traffic accident (RTA) claims: • where the claim includes damages in respect of personal injury • with a value between £1,000 and £25,000 where the accident occurred on or after 31 July 2013 or; £1,000–£10,000 where the accident occurred on or after 30 April 2010 and before 31 July 2013 • where the accident occurred in England or Wales EL/PL The protocol applies to claims: • where either the

Section 61 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 The Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993, s 61 (LRHUDA 1993) allows a landlord to terminate a new lease of a flat (ie one granted pursuant to LRHUDA 1993, s 56) on the grounds of redevelopment, provided that the court is satisfied that the landlord, as per LRHUDA 1993, s 61(1): • intends for the purposes of redevelopment: ◦ to demolish or reconstruct, or ◦ to carry out substantial construction works on the whole or part of the premises in which the flat is contained; and • could not reasonably do so without obtaining possession of the flat There are strict time scales for the landlord to make the application to court as per LRHUDA 1993, s 61(2), namely: • during the 12 month period before the expiry of