Contractual and statutory basis of rent review and time intervals Tenants under 1991 Act Tenancies benefit from substantial security of tenure and statutory tacit relocation. Parties are free to make provision for rent review in their contract of lease, but subject to that rent review is regulated by the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1991, s 13 (AH(S)A 1991) which deals with variation in rent after the contractual ish has expired and at prescribed intervals thereafter. Almost all 1991 Act tenancies are running on tacit relocation. Rent review is therefore, in almost every case, governed by AH(S)A 1991, s 13. This procedure cannot be contracted out of, although the parties may agree a variation of rent between themselves at any time. In Moll v McGregor 1990 SLT (Land Ct) 59 (not reported by LexisNexis®), one lease was dated from 1944 and another from earlier. In 1977, the parties sought to modify a lease then running on tacit relocation by linking rent to review on indexation. It was held that it was not

This Practice Note considers the circumstances in which a settlement agreement may be set aside, including on the grounds of validity, whether by reason of capacity, mistake, illegality, fraud, so-called ‘sharp practice’ and duress. Challenging the validity of a settlement agreement Where the validity of a settlement agreement the subject of a Tomlin order or another final order made by consent is challenged, if proceedings were in existence before the settlement was made, a party may apply in the current proceedings to set aside the court order giving effect to the settlement under CPR 3.1(2)(p). This rule enables the court, under its general powers of case management, to make any order for the purpose of managing the case and furthering the overriding objective. Under the law of contract, there are circumstances in which a settlement agreement may be ineffective and it can be set aside. These include: • where one of the parties lacks capacity (for example, a child or a person lacking capacity under Mental Capacity Act 2005)—see: Setting aside a settlement

This Practice Note considers issues relating to settlement of disputes in the context of arbitration proceedings. This topic is discussed with reference to general practice in international arbitration, relevant provisions of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996), as it applies in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as selected arbitration rules. Settlement negotiations and arbitration It will, generally speaking, be in the best interests of a party to explore all genuine opportunities to settle given the time, cost, outcome risk, reputation, relationship and other potential implications of being involved in a dispute of any kind. The parties to a dispute may engage in settlement negotiations or an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process such as mediation before arbitration proceedings have been contemplated or commenced. In the event that an attempt at settlement is successful at that early stage, the parties will typically record their mutual understanding in a settlement agreement, which can be enforced as a legally binding contract between the parties. For general guidance on pre-action settlement in English civil litigation proceedings, as well as the possibility

This Practice Note considers the role of state immunity in relation to arbitration proceedings in Sweden. For a general introduction to state immunity and arbitration, see Practice Note: State immunity and arbitration—general considerations. In addition, for Practice Notes on state immunity in a number of jurisdictions around the world (including England and Wales), see our ‘State immunity’ subtopic: State immunity and arbitration—overview Introduction—State immunity and international arbitration As a general rule, Swedish courts will respect state immunity in relation to sovereign acts but not for commercial acts. Accordingly, the signing of an arbitration clause generally constitutes a waiver of immunity in respect to arbitral and court proceedings relating to a contract. Problems may however arise in the enforcement stage of an arbitral award. The question then becomes whether the property subjected to the execution measures is significantly used for official purposes. If that is the case, the property is protected. If not, state immunity cannot be invoked, which will be elaborated below. In this context, it is important to clarify that arbitration

This is a template statutory declaration confirming whether any statutory planning notices have been served, or other planning enforcement action taken, in respect of a property during a specified period of time. It also confirms whether any development works have been carried out at the property, with or without planning permission, during the said period. The specified period is usually the period of time for which the person or company signing the declaration has owned the property. The declaration is usually signed by an individual or company director having direct knowledge of the property for the specified period, who can confirm the facts stated are true and accurate. The declaration is most often used in the context of the sale of a property, to make the purchaser aware of any planning or planning enforcement issues. The declaration should be adapted to the specific facts and planning history of the subject property. If the contract for sale is subject to General Condition 32 (unamended) of the Law Society’s ‘Conditions of Sale 2023’, then it is not

As explained in Practice Note: Unjust enrichment—elements of the claim, claims in unjust enrichment generally require consideration of four different matters: • the defendant must have been enriched • that enrichment must have been at the claimant’s expense • there needs to be an ‘unjust factor’ which renders the defendant’s retention of that enrichment unjust • the defendant may have a specific defence Unjust enrichment claims are highly fact-specific. This Practice Note provides examples of how the courts have approached these issues in practice and illustrates the broad range of scenarios in which claims in unjust enrichment may exist. Case details Brief outline of facts Nature of defendant’s enrichment ‘At the claimant’s expense’ Why was the enrichment ‘unjust’? Defences to restitution? Comments AG Retail Num (6) Ltd v Andron Contract Services Ltd [2026] EWHC 1951 (KB)30 July 2026 The claimant had provided facilities management services for a shopping centre. The former leaseholder (Alaska) had gone into receivership and the defendant, Andron, had acquired the lease from the receivers.By mistake, unpaid debts due to the claimant had

This Practice Note considers issues arising when multiple defendants (or co-defendants), domiciled in England and Wales, are or may be involved in proceedings in this jurisdiction, from the perspective of the claimant and the defendants. For information on the specific issues to consider with regard to liability in tortious claims which involve more than one defendant or prospective defendant, see Practice Note: Multiple tortfeasors—liability issues. For information on joint and several liability between multiple parties to a contract or between joint tortfeasors, and guidance on who should be sued in these situations, see Practice Note: Joint, several, and joint and several liability. Considerations for the claimant Where a claimant has suffered loss or damage, they may consider that more than one party is responsible for that loss or damage and will need to decide against whom to bring proceedings. This will involve consideration of many issues, including the limitation periods that apply to each claim, the merits of the claim against each potential defendant, the means of each defendant

1 Introduction 1.1 Date of report: [insert date] Date of last report: [insert date] Author of report: [insert name and role] 1.2 This report identifies key legal risks, arising from two main sources: 1.2.1 the operation of the legal team itself (narrow legal risks); 1.2.2 other business risks that have a legal component, eg litigation risk, transactional risk, breach of intellectual property rights or risks arising out of a change of law (broader legal risks). 1.3 For more in-depth analysis of [insert organisation’s name]’s legal risks, see Appendix 1 (Legal risk register) and Appendix 2 (Litigation register). 2 Legal operations This section reports on risks to the business arising out of the internal functioning of the legal department. The table below reflects the top [insert number, eg three] highest-rated legal operations risks recorded in the legal risk register at Appendix 1. Risk RAG (red, amber, green) rating Details Mitigation and status [Insert, eg Operational departments dabbling in their own legal work] [Insert, eg Red] [Insert, eg Two known recent incidents of operational departments failing to refer work requiring legal input to legal department. One related to a contract valued at £200k] [Insert, eg Internal framework for instructing legal team already in place. Annual

1 Introduction 1.1 This document sets out procedures for the legal team in relation to: 1.1.1 matter opening and file maintenance; 1.1.2 matter progression; 1.1.3 matter conclusion; 1.1.4 supervision; 1.1.5 instructing external lawyers; 1.1.6 conflicts of interest; and 1.1.7 confidentiality and disclosure. 2 Responsibility and application 2.1 [Insert name, department or role holder] is responsible for this document. 2.2 The policies and procedures set out in this document apply to all current and former members of the legal team (legal staff), including employees, temporary and agency workers, interns, volunteers and apprentices. 2.3 All legal staff must be familiar with this document and comply with its terms. 2.4 This document does not form part of any employee’s contract of employment and [insert organisation’s name] may supplement or amend this policy with additional policies and guidelines from time to time. Any new or modified policy will be circulated to legal staff before being adopted. 3 Matter opening and file maintenance 3.1 Maintaining legal files in a systematic and reliable manner is essential to ensure: 3.1.1 consistency of approach; 3.1.2 if required, any member of the legal team can pick up your workload easily or check the status of any matter and the actions taken to date; 3.1.3 important information

This Precedent is a pro-forma letter for a client to send to a self-employed individual consultant, or to a service company through which an individual consultant is providing consultancy services, in order to give written notice of termination of the engagement under the termination provisions of the consultancy agreement. The letter sets out the ground(s) relied upon, details of the default (where relevant) and then reminds the consultant of their obligations on termination, such as return of company property, and reminds the consultant of any post-termination restrictions (restrictive covenants). It deals with payments due on termination and administrative matters. The Precedent is drafted on the basis that the consultant is an individual. If the client has contracted with a service company through which an individual consultant is providing consultancy services, this Precedent can be adapted accordingly. As an essential first step, you should of course check the requirements of the termination provisions that apply to the individual concerned. The normal rules of contract law allow the parties to agree the circumstances in which the

Strictly private and confidential To: [Insert potential seller name] [Insert potential seller address] FAO: [insert name of relevant contact at the seller] Date: [insert date] Subject to contract Heads of terms (also known as an offer letter, term sheet, letter of intent or memorandum of understanding) set out, in a short document, a broad outline of the parties' expectations, understanding and agreement of the key terms of the proposed transaction which they have agreed in principle. Where used, heads will be signed at the beginning of the transaction as soon as the parties agree key terms and before the buyer incurs costs in conducting its due diligence and negotiating the transaction documents. Whilst the heads will not compel the parties to conclude the transaction on the stated terms, or even at all, they are intended to establish, in principle, the main commercial terms of a deal. There is no standard format for heads of terms and they can either take the form of a letter (as is common) or an agreement. Either party can prepare the heads

Case study Where part of a property is being transferred and requires an easement over adjoining land for the installation of a water pipeline and the adjoining land is registered under two titles, namely, a freehold title and freehold title to mines and minerals under the land (currently registered in the name of the same party) should the easement (ie the ability to lay a water pipeline under the land thereby affecting the mines and minerals) be granted by the adjoining owner as owner of both titles and registered against both titles (including that to mines and minerals) and what will the process be in registering this easement against the title to the mines and minerals at the HM Land Registry? This Q&A raises the issue of the extent to which an easement will bind third parties, that is to say subsequent owners of the land which they affect. As between the original parties, there is effectively a contract by which each party is bound. The