Refine By
Clear all filter
About 90774 results for "*"
A deed of covenant has been executed in counterpart. One party has executed an old version of the document, the other has executed the final agreed version of the document. As a result the completed counterparts do not match. How can the incorrect counterpart be dealt with?
Q&As
Execution of a deed To execute a deed in counterpart, the parties must sign identical copies of the document and exchange them with each other. Combined, these counterparts are treated as a single document which takes effect as a deed. In this scenario, one party has made an error in executing its counterpart and as a result the deed is invalid. How this situation can be dealt with depends on the context of the scenario and the relationship between the parties. If the parties are in agreement that the second document is the final agreed version and a mistake has been made, it may be possible to rectify the situation by re-executing the deed. Re-execution The most straightforward solution is for the parties to the agreement to simply
A deed of grant of easement imposes land registry restrictions on both the servient and dominant tenement titles to ensure that a deed of covenant is entered into by future successors in title. The grantor and the grantee have entered into positive and restrictive covenants. Should the deed of covenant enforce just the positive covenants, or the restrictive covenants as well (even though they run with the land in any case)?
Q&As
Easements—generally An easement is an incorporeal right enjoyed by the owner of a legal estate (dominant tenement) over land in the ownership of another person (servient tenement) that binds successors in title. Easements are usually positive, giving the dominant owner the right to enter or use the servient land in some way (eg a right of way). However, they can be negative preventing something being done on the servient land and so giving the dominant owner the right to receive something from the servient land (eg a right to light). An easement has four essential characteristics: • there must be a dominant and a servient tenement • the easement must accommodate
A deed of variation not for value is being completed in respect of a registered lease. It is not possible as a result to carry out a official search with priority (section 72 of the Land Registration Act 2002 and the Land Registration Rules 2003, SI 2003/1417, r 131). What other pre-completion searches may be carried out (if any) to reveal any entries on the registered title which may affect the deed of variation?
Q&As
The official search procedure at HM Land Registry allows for the updating of the details of an office copy entry of the register by checking up-to-date entries in the register of title, getting details of pending applications or priority official searches, and ensuring insofar as possible that no adverse entries are made in the register before a protectable disposition is completed by registration. For more information, see HM Land Registry Practice Guide 12. Section 72 of the Land Registration Act 2002 and the Land Registration Rules 2003 (LRR 2003), SI 2003/1417, r 131 allow a priority search only in respect of
A deed of variation of a deceased's estate is ineffective for tax purposes as it does not refer to the section 142 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984) and section 62(6) of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (TCGA 1992). What options do the parties to the deed have to revoke or amend the current deed and replace it with a revised deed of variation which does contain the relevant tax statements?
Q&As
If the existing deed is not valid and effective as it stands, then revocation or variation of the deed will not apply. Validity is a question of both form and content. If the deed is not valid, then a 'new' deed which complies with section 142 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (IHTA 1984) and section 62(6) of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (TCGA 1992) could be executed by the parties. For information on deeds and their valid
A deed of variation to a Will has been prepared to include a discretionary trust with named charities and individual family members as beneficiaries. Will it be possible to change the charity beneficiaries in the future?
Q&As
A ‘deed of variation’ is the expression normally used for a deed which varies the terms of a deceased person’s Will and which often includes a statement that the provisions of section 142 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 are to apply to it. Such a deed normally ‘re-directs’ an outright disposition occurring in favour of an individual on death. The ‘re-direction’ can be to a different individual or into trust. Unless a power of revocation has been reserved (which is rare) a gift into trust is an outright disposition of the settlor’s interest in the property given away. Notwithstanding the gift is made into trust by means of a deed of variation, the law generally pertaining to gifts will apply. Accordingly, unless the deed was incorrectly drafted, and did not reflect the settlor’s intentions (in which case rectification may be available)
A deep dive into the EDPB’s Opinion on personal data processing in the context of AI models
NEWS
EU law analysis: On 17 December 2024, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) adopted Opinion 28/2024 on certain data protection aspects related to the processing of personal data in the context of AI models (the Opinion). In this News Analysis Alex Jameson of Bird & Bird considers the background to the Opinion and the key takeaways.
A defendant has made an application to amend their defence in an EL Multi-track Claim. The claimant has made a Part 18 request for information but has not consented to the amendments. A cross-application was made by the claimant for a response to the Part 18 request and an extension of time to file a witness statement. Statements are due to be exchanged in the extended directions in two weeks’ time. The court has adjourned the hearing of both applications to an unknown date in the future. What happens in relation to witness evidence? If exchange does not occur within two weeks, will the claimant be in breach of the directions? What if the extension is refused?
Q&As
At the crux of the issue posed by the question is the position of a party who fails to comply with a direction of the court but who has made an application to extend time for compliance prior to the deadline for that direction. In the situation described, the claimant will be in breach of the court order with respect
A defendant has variously instructed new solicitors and is now progressing as a litigant in person with a direct access barrister. After each change, the defence has been changed with no formal applications being made to the court. What redress do I have in seeking costs occasioned by the amendments and as a penalty for effectively wasting the past two years?
Q&As
Amending a statement of case CPR 17.1 states that: ‘(1) A party may amend his statement of case at any time before it has been served on any other party. (2) If his statement of case has been served, a party may amend it only- (a) with the written consent of all the other parties; or (b) with the permission of the court.’ For further information on the approach a party should adopt when amending a statement of case, see Practice Note: Amending a statement of case—introduction. In particular, once a statement of case has been served, the permission of the court will be required to amend unless the other parties have consented in writing
A defendant in Cyprus has expressly agreed to accept service by email. Do I still need to make an application for permission to serve the claim form out of the jurisdiction?
Q&As
Cyprus is part of the EU. This Q&A considers the rules of service to a defendant outside of the UK but inside the EU. The process of effecting service of documents between EU Member States is governed by the process of service rules set out in Regulation (EC) 1393/2007, the Service Regulation (CPR 6.40(3)(a)(i)). This is a mandatory and exhaustive code and must be complied with. Although the UK left the EU on 31 January 2020, the Service Regulation continues to apply between the UK and EU Member States during 2020 due to transitional provisions in Article 68 of the Withdrawal Agreement between the UK and the EU.
A defendant tenant in a contested Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 renewal case elects to abandon its defence and vacate the property. Should the tenant apply to amend its defence or take some other step in the proceedings? Will the tenant be liable for the landlord's costs if it abandons its defence?
Q&As
This Q&A assumes that the contractual termination date of the lease has passed. A landlord's application for termination of a tenancy is made under section 29(2) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) and is a CPR Part 7 claim. See generally Practice Note: LTA 1954 business lease renewal—proceedings (under 'Opposed application—procedure'). A defendant to a Part 7 claim who wishes to withdraw their defence would be well advised to seek to negotiate with the landlord and submit a consent order providing for the dismissal of the proceedings on an agreed date. The tenancy will then end three months and 21 days later
A deposit was paid in connection with an AST by a third party on behalf of the tenant (who was also the guarantor). The deposit was not protected by the landlord as required. The tenant is threatening to pursue a claim for compensation pursuant to section 214 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004). HA 2004 refers to the application being made by ‘the tenant or any relevant person (as defined by HA 2004, s 213(1))’, which would include the third party. However, does the tenant have standing to pursue a claim when the deposit was in fact paid by a ‘relevant person’ or does the third party have to apply?
Q&As
Section 213 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004) (as amended) states that any person receiving a tenancy deposit must deal with it in accordance with an authorised scheme, the initial requirements of the scheme must be complied with within 30 days of receipt, and the prescribed information be provided to the tenant within the same period. A failure to do so entitles the
A deposit was put in a tenancy deposit scheme (TDS) by a landlord’s agent. The landlord then changed agents without informing the TDS. At the end of the tenancy, the landlord raised a deposit dispute for disrepair with the original agent, but the original agent did not inform the TDS of the dispute and returned the full deposit to the tenant. Does the landlord have a claim against the original agent or the tenant in respect of the cost of rectifying the disrepair?
Q&As
Since 6 April 2007, a landlord must comply with the initial requirements of the tenancy deposit scheme (TDS) within 30 days of receipt of a deposit in respect of an assured shorthold tenancy (AST). The requirements are to provide the tenant and any relevant person (meaning someone who pays the deposit on the tenant's behalf) certain prescribed information about the TDS, the deposit and the AST. Failure to do so will prevent the landlord from serving a valid notice pursuant to section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 to determine the AST, and the landlord may