Agreements under section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 (HiA 1980) (known as section 38 agreements) are agreements between a local highway authority and a person who has the power to dedicate private land as a highway so that it becomes maintainable at the public expense on the date set out in the agreement. Further information regarding section 38 agreements can be found in Practice Note: Highways—adoption agreements. An agreement pursuant to HiA 1980, s 38 is in principle a contractual arrangement, albeit one where the terms of the agreement are governed by statute. The general principle governing the assignment of contracts is that assignment is permissible unless there is an express prohibition contained within the contract itself or a statutory provision prohibiting assignment. Only a small number of contractual

Although there are specific provisions in the Highways Act 1980 (as amended) (HiA 1980) which allow highway authorities to take action against those causing damage to a highway, these provisions do not extend to damage to infrastructure such as a bridge. The reason for this appears to be that, for example in the case of

The legal concept of enlargement is where a tenant can unilaterally declare (by deed) that his leasehold term of years is transformed, or ‘enlarged’, into a freehold estate as of the moment when he enters into that deed. The tenant 'ousts' his landlord, and becomes the freeholder himself, merely by way of a piece of paper and its subsequent registration at HM Land Registry. Governed by the provisions

The freeholder or head tenant of a commercial premises is free to dispose of their interest without reference to any tenant, as the rights of the tenant are, broadly speaking, unaffected. If the lease predates 1 January 1996, the original landlord will remain obliged to perform any covenants contained in the sublease—if the lease is after that time the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Act 1995 will apply. The tenant continues in the same position as previously, and if the lease is subject to the provisions of Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954), security of tenure continues to apply. See

We are not aware of a statutory scheme which would protect a landowner from the exception of mines and minerals in a conveyance provided the exception has been properly drafted and the interest exists, however if you require specific guidance or advice on this matter, we would recommend seeking an opinion from external counsel. We have therefore set out information in relation to exceptions for mines and minerals which we hope you will find useful. Mines and minerals in their original position are part and parcel of the land. The common law presumption is that a landowner owns everything below the surface down to the centre of the earth. Unworked mines and minerals are the property of the surface owner. The common law presumption may be rebutted by showing that severance has occurred. Severance includes a conveyance or demise excepting the

We refer you to the following Practice Notes: • Calculating a section 75 debt • The recovery of section 75 debts in practice The section 75 debt regime is governed by sections 75–75A of the Pensions Act 1995 and the Occupational Pension Schemes (Employer Debt) Regulations 2005, SI 2005/678. Under this legislation, responsibilities for the determination of the section 75 debt are split between the trustees and the scheme actuary. The trustees are responsible for: • determining the assets • valuing them • deciding which liabilities need to be taken into account, and • estimating the expenses that will be incurred in winding up the scheme The actuary is responsible for valuing the liabilities in respect

We are not aware of any provision in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 under which a qualifying tenant,

Section 20B of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (LTA 1985) precludes the recovery from a residential leasehold tenant of service charge relating to relevant expenses incurred more than 18 months prior to the demand unless the tenant has had prior written notice (given within the 18-month period after the costs were incurred): • that those costs had been incurred, and • that he would subsequently be required under the terms of his lease to contribute to them by the

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. Our research for this Q&A is confined to a situation where there is a petition by a creditor to wind up a limited company (rather than a petition in bankruptcy over an individual). A winding-up petition can be withdrawn by the creditor by an order of the court in accordance with rule 4.15 of the Insolvency

A constructive trust is an equitable remedy involving the court imposing a trust in relation to property held by someone who has been unjustly enriched by it, to benefit a party that has been wrongfully deprived of its rights. For further guidance on constructive trusts, including the limitation period for making a claim against the owner of the legal title, see Practice Notes: • Constructive trusts • Limitation—constructive trust claims A claim for a beneficial interest

Applications for banning orders Part 2 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 (HPA 2016) (HPA 2016, s 13) makes provisions regarding rogue landlords and property agents in England. Chapter 2 of Part 2 deals with banning orders. Under HPA 2016, s 14 a banning order is an order made by the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) which bans a person from: • letting housing in England • engaging in English letting agency work • engaging in English property management work, or • doing two or more of those things HPA 2016, s 15 provides that a local housing authority may apply for a banning order against a person who has been convicted of 'a banning order offence'. Pursuant to HPA 2016, s 14(3) the term 'banning order offence' means: '…an offence of a description specified in regulations made by the Secretary

During the administration of an estate, there does not appear to be any time limit for appropriating an asset within the deceased person's estate to a beneficiary. The effect of an appropriation is to give a residuary beneficiary of an estate an absolute beneficial interest in the asset or property appropriated. When the administration period has ended, it may then be too late to appropriate an asset because the legatees would at that point