When the conservatory was constructed is an important consideration. Private sewers and lateral drains that were connected to the public sewer before 1 July 2011 were transferred on 1 October 2011 to sewerage undertakers. It is common to find conservatories and other extensions constructed less than 3 metres from a public sewer that was not a public sewer at the time the conservatory/extension was constructed, but was instead a private sewer the responsibility of the homeowner. If the conservatory was constructed prior to 1 July 2011, then it will have required express planning permission or permitted development rights, and it may have required building regulations approval. It would not have required a build over agreement from the sewerage undertaker if the sewer was private. Under Part H4 of Schedule 1 to the Building Regulations 2010, SI 2010/2214, the consent of the sewerage undertaker is required for building works over

Local Government analysis: This High Court decision further clarifies what constitutes beneficial occupation for the purposes of non-domestic rating. The ratepayer was intermittently using a large empty building for fairly minimal storage with the intention of mitigating its liability to unoccupied non-domestic rates on the basis of a scheme first considered in R (Makro Properties Ltd) v Nuneaton & Bedworth BC. The Council was arguing that the minimal storage use of potentially redundant items was not of value to the occupier and so did not meet the third test or ‘ingredient’ of rateable occupation. That argument was rejected by the court: slight use coupled with an intention to occupy is sufficient to constitute rateable occupation. Further, the required intention to occupy is necessarily present in a ratepayer seeking to mitigate its liability by intermittent occupation. Written by Jenny Wigley QC at Landmark Chambers.

Where the identity of the contracting parties is disputed, the court will disregard the parties’ subjective beliefs and consider what a reasonable person would conclude. The question of who were the parties to a contract is to be determined by an objective test: it turns on what a reasonable person would conclude, if furnished with the relevant information and disregarding the parties’ private thoughts. Where the issue is whether a person signing a document did so as agent for a company

The rights under a manufacturer’s guarantee are separate to and in addition to the rights in the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015). A consumer does not have to avail themselves of the remedies under a manufacturer’s guarantee and if it has expired, they still have their rights against the retailer under CRA 2015. For guidance on this issue, see section Guarantees and extended warranty insurance in Practice Note: Consumer Rights Act 2015—summary—Goods. Under CRA 2015, s 23, if the customer no longer has the right to reject the goods because the 30-day period has expired, they can ask the trader

A deposit serves two purposes: • security for the performance of the contract • part payment of the purchase price if the sale completes If the deposit is held as stakeholder, the stakeholder can only pay the deposit to the person rightfully entitled to it, ie the seller on completion.

When is notice given? Notice of dismissal can generally only be effective if and when received by the employee, ie the dismissal must be communicated in order to be effective. In the absence of an express contractual provision to the contrary, when an employer sends notice of dismissal to an employee by post to the home address, the notice period starts to run when the employee,

In answering this Q&A, we assume that all parties belong in the UK. It is standard practice for commercial contracts to include a clause providing that, if the supply to which the contract relates is chargeable to VAT, VAT will be payable in addition to the consideration set out in the contract. This clause does not determine whether or not VAT is chargeable on the supply. The question of whether VAT is chargeable will be determined by the nature

A periodic tenancy is capable of being a business tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) so that tenants have security of tenure. This distinguishes a periodic tenancy from other types of tenancies, eg a tenancy at will, service tenancy or a short-term business tenancy under LTA 1954, s 43(3), which are not capable of being protected tenancies under LTA 1954. A periodic tenancy cannot be contracted

Dynamic Purchasing Systems A Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) allows a contracting authority to purchase goods, services and works for which they have a regular need, without having to carry out a full public procurement process for each individual purchase. A DPS is intended for procurement of common use items that are generally available on the market and meet the contracting authority’s requirements. For background reading, see: • Practice Notes: Introduction to public contracts procurement—pre PA 2023 [Archived] and Introduction to framework agreements and dynamic purchasing systems—pre-PA 2023 • Crown Commercial Service (CCS): Dynamic purchasing system guidance Under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102, a contracting authority establishing a DPS must comply with the rules specified and cross-referred under PCR 2015, SI 2015/102, reg 34. In

This Q&A concerns a contract for land and vehicles―a mixed contract. Not all land deals require a public procurement procedure advertised in the Official Journal of the European Union. It will likely depend on the nature of the deal and the contracting authority’s role within, but it can be a procurable element of a contract. The Public Contract Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102, will not apply when a contract includes mixed elements that cannot be separated and the elements of a procurable nature are not the main object of the contract. Here, the question is whether the main element of the contract is the vehicles or the land. Under PCR

The pre-completion transaction rules (PCT rules) include a number of defined terms. For an explanation of these, see Practice Note: SDLT—pre-completion transactions—Defined terms under PCT rules. The rules are different for assignments of rights (see paragraph 8 of Schedule 2A to the Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) (FA 2003, Sch 2A,

Is there a service provision change? A service provision change under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006, SI 2006/246 (TUPE 2006) may involve any one of three possibilities: • outsourcing: where activities cease to be carried out by a person ('a client') on his own behalf and are carried out instead by another person on the client's behalf ('a contractor') • change of contractor: where activities cease to be carried out by a contractor on a client's behalf (whether or not those activities had previously been carried out by the client on his own behalf) and are carried