Section 1(1) of the British Nationality Act 1981 (BNA 1981) provides that a person born in the UK or in a qualifying territory is a British citizen if, at the time of their birth, their father or mother is: • a British citizen, or • settled in the UK or in the qualifying territory A person is ‘settled’ in the UK where they are: (i) ordinarily resident in the UK, (ii) without being subject under the immigration laws to any restriction on the period for which they may remain. In 2016, EU free movement law was still in

The court has limited jurisdiction to deal with child maintenance within financial remedy proceedings, due to the provisions of the Child Support Act 1991 (as amended) (CSA 1991). Although the court retains a residual jurisdiction in respect of high earners through the topping up provisions, it can only make an effective order in relation to child maintenance by consent (or in some other limited circumstances including a party living abroad in which case the courts retain jurisdiction), and that order will be amenable after a period of 12 months to one or the other of the parties opting out by applying for a child maintenance service (CMS) assessment.

Common intention constructive trusts are not limited to cases of cohabiting couples. See the comments of Lord Justice Henderson

The Pre-Action Protocol for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes applies to all claims against hospitals, GPs, dentists and other healthcare providers (both NHS and

It has been assumed that the claim is for damages to a vehicle and not a claim for damages for personal injury. This Q&A focuses on whether such a claim is brought as a general negligence claim in tort or whether a specific statutory regime governs such claims. In a claim for negligence, practitioners should consider any relevant legislation depending on the facts of the case. For example, if a party had to hire a vehicle, some credit hire agreements have been vulnerable to attack as unenforceable where the credit hire company has failed to comply with certain consumer regulations. With regards to a general negligence claim in tort, for liability to be founded,

Multiple dwellings relief (MDR) provides a partial relief. It must be claimed in a stamp duty land tax (SDLT) return or in an amendment to an SDLT return under section 58D(2) of the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003). Except where otherwise provided, a return cannot be amended more than one year after the filing date for the transaction (FA 2003, Sch 10 Pt 1, para 6). No provision is made for a return to be amended more than one year after the filing date where a relief has not been claimed in an SDLT return so

Proprietary estoppel can be applied in a wide range of circumstances, but, in all cases, the key requirements are broadly that a representation, or promise or assurance, is made to the claimant that led them to act as they did, the claimant must reasonably rely upon those representations to their detriment, and it must be unconscionable

The tenant’s right to compensation for improvements is set out in section 1 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 (LTA 1927). LTA 1927, s 21 provides that the appropriate tribunal for hearing such applications is the County Court. The Civil Procedure Rules 1988 (CPR) set out the administrative rules of court, along with the Practice Directions (PD) which direct what steps

Notwithstanding the principle of caveat emptor, a seller is under a common law duty to disclose latent defects in title. A latent defect is a defect which would not be apparent to a buyer on inspection and can include, for example, a right of way or other easement or, in the case of leasehold property, the existence of grounds for forfeiture. A patent defect, by contrast, is one which is visible to the buyer or one whose existence can be deduced from something visible to the buyer. A seller is obliged to disclose latent defects in title regardless of whether or not the buyer asks. A seller should also be aware of the overlap between their duty of disclosure and the covenants for title (or title

It is common for employment contracts to allow the employer to recoup relocation, training and other expenses incurred by it in respect of the employee. See, for example, Precedents: • Clauses—place of work, residence, mobility and relocation • Agreement—education and training costs • Clauses—deductions Sometimes, the relevant clause will specify that the obligation to repay certain expenses incurred on the employee's behalf by the employer will only be triggered if the employee does a certain thing and, if that trigger event does not occur, the employer will not seek repayment. Penalties A penalty is a payment of money stipulated in order to punish the offending party if it breaches the contract. The penalty rule: • may potentially apply in circumstances where the contract: ◦ contains an obligation on one party to perform an act, and also ◦ provides that, if that party does not perform

The right to buy, governed by the Housing Act 1980 and Housing Act 1985 (HA 1985), sets out a statutory procedure whereby certain tenants of local authority housing can exercise the right to buy a leasehold interest of the property of which they are tenants at a discount. The amount of the discount depends upon the period that the tenant has been the secure tenant of the property. The right applies to both flats and houses. If the dwelling-house is a house and the landlord owns the freehold, the right is to acquire that freehold. If the landlord does not own the freehold or if

Trustees contract in their personal capacity and so want to avoid personal liability. When trustees enter into contracts with third parties, they are personally liable on those contracts unless there is a term in the contract which limits their liability to the trust assets (see Muir v City of Glasgow Bank). Trustees will invariably seek to exclude personal liability altogether or to limit their liability to the value of the trust assets under their control from time to time (which may become nil if the land being sold is the only trust asset). Being described in the contract as trustees will not be enough. In Lumsden v Buchanan (1865) 13 LT 174, 4 Macq 950 (not reported by LexisNexis®’),