Law360: More than three-quarters of retirement savings plan trustees have said they are planning to use new powers floated by the government that will allow them to distribute surpluses tied up in their schemes, XPS Group, a consultancy, has said.

Law360: Almost three in ten retirees over the age of 55 have said they had withdrawn money from their pension before retirement as savers continue to feel squeezed by rising living costs, Just Group said on 4 June 2024.

In practice, a necessary party is someone who must be joined to proceedings so the court can grant effective, binding relief and avoid prejudice or inconsistent judgments. Their legal rights or obligations will be directly affected by the order sought, or relief cannot be achieved in their absence.The expression is grounded in procedural rules and case law rather than a single statutory definition. In England and Wales, CPR Part 19 empowers the court to add parties where it is desirable to resolve all matters in dispute; courts still use “necessary” or “indispensable” to describe parties without whom effective relief cannot be granted. In Northern Ireland (RSC (NI) Ord 15 r 6) and Ireland (RSC Ord 15 r 13), the rules expressly refer to adding any person whose presence is necessary to “effectually and completely adjudicate upon” all questions. In Scotland, the concept is reflected in the requirement to call “necessary defenders” in certain actions (e.g., reduction), with the court able to ordain intimation and sist parties.Key points: failure to join may lead to directions to add the party, a stay, or refusal of relief; judgments may not bind absent necessary parties; late joinder can raise limitation and costs issues. Distinguish from a “proper” or “interested” party, whose presence is useful but not essential.

Local Government analysis: This Court of Appeal judgment provides a reminder to judges when making final care orders (or declining to do so as in this case) of the need to undertake a careful and holistic risk assessment within any final judgment. The judgment is a clear reminder of the need to assess risk with reference to the facts and as set against the welfare checklist and to properly analyse all parts of the evidence heard and illustrate this in the judgement. The court determined that the evaluation required a careful analysis of the evidence which regrettably was not carried out in this case. Written by Hannah Markham KC, head of team at 36 Family.

To [insert name of building owner] (‘Building Owner’) Of [insert Building Owner’s main address] The Party Wall etc Act 1996 Acknowledgement of Notice As adjoining owner[s] under the Party Wall etc Act 1996 (the Act) of [insert adjoining owner’s building address]

This Practice Note considers negative declarations. It first considers what a negative declaration is, followed by the power of the High Court to make a negative declaration. It then looks at the approach of the court. It sets out the principles the court will apply when determining whether to make a negative declaration and provides guidance on how to make an application for a negative declaration. What is a negative declaration? A declaration is essentially a statement made by the court at the request of a party. This might be in relation to the rights of a party to a dispute, the existence of certain facts or a principle of law. For guidance on declarations generally, see Practice Note: Declaratory relief. A negative declaration is a declaration framed in the negative. It is an unusual remedy in that it effectively reverses the more usual roles of the parties, as explained in the judgment of Lord Woolf in the Court of Appeal decision in Messier-Dowty Ltd v Sabena SA (2001): ‘42. ...The natural defendant becomes the claimant

To [insert name of building owner] (‘Building Owner’) Of [insert Building Owner’s main address] The Party Wall etc Act 1996 Acknowledgement of Notice As adjoining owner/s under the Party Wall etc Act 1996 (the Act) of [insert address of adjoining owner’s building] and having received

A bond is said to exhibit negative convexity when its price rises less for a downward move in yield than its price declines for an equal upward move in yield.

Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court held on appeal that a trial judge did not err in exercising his discretion to grant declaratory relief to a defendant which at trial denied the existence of an alleged easement and counter-claimed for relief (a ‘negative declaration’). The trial judge had been entitled to find that the easement did not exist. The judge was further justified in finding that granting a negative declaration would serve a useful purpose in reducing the prospect of further litigation between the parties. Written by Niraj Modha, barrister, at 39 Essex Chambers.

This Practice Note provides illustrative decisions of the courts approach when dealing with applications for a negative declaration. It is important to note, that the remedy of a negative declaration is entirely at the court’s discretion and each case will turn on its own facts. The judgments referred to in this Practice Note do not have any precedent value, rather they should be seen as merely providing an insight into the potential issues that may be considered. Judgment and citation Considerations Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Protopapas [2024] EWHC 2999 (Ch) The judge in considering whether to make negative declarations noted that the decision in BNP Paribas SA v Trattamento Rifiuti Metropolitani SpA [2020] EWHC 2436 (Comm) provided a very useful consideration of the authorities and guidance.Negative declarations were sought in respect of a receiver who was not before the court. However, the judge considered that the receiver’s case was very clear from the myriad of court documents he had filed in the South Carolina courts and his response to a letter before action. Two further

An undertaking by a borrower not to create or permit to subsist any security interest or encumbrance over its assets without the consent of the lender.

This Practice Note examines: • why negative pledge clauses are used in commercial transactions • the consequences of breaching negative pledge provisions • how negative pledges are viewed in the context of security and quasi-security, and • key considerations when drafting a negative pledge clause Where appropriate, this Practice Note highlights relevant provisions in Precedent: Facility agreement (term loan): single company borrower—bilateral—with or without security or a guarantee and the Loan Market Association (LMA) investment grade multicurrency term facility agreement (the LMA facility agreement) (available to LMA members on the LMA website). What is a negative pledge? A negative pledge is a contractual undertaking, often contained in a facility agreement, which prohibits or restricts the promisor from creating encumbrances over its assets in favour of a third party. Negative pledges can prohibit the borrower entering into certain other arrangements that fall short of granting a full security interest but have a similar effect (for further information, see Practice Note: Granting security—key issues for borrowers). In lending transactions, a negative pledge is commonly given