NOTE: THIS PRACTICE NOTE IS FOR HISTORICAL REFERENCE ONLY. It considers charging orders under the regime in force prior to 6 April 2016, including what charging orders are, when it may be appropriate to seek to obtain a charging order and the jurisdiction for doing so. If you are considering seeking a charging order on/after 6 April 2016, please see Practice Note: Charging orders—what are they and when to use them—CPR 73 and related content. For guidance on the procedure for obtaining a charging order (both interim and final), see Practice Note: Pre-6 April 2016—Obtaining interim charging orders and final charging orders—the procedure. This Practice Note refers to the following legislation: • Charging Orders Act 1979 as COA 1979 • Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 as TCEA 2007 • Partnership Act 1890 as PA 1890 Charging orders—the changes in force as from 6 April 2016 With effect from 6 April 2016 the procedure for seeking an interim and final charging order changed, with amendment being

NOTE: THIS PRACTICE NOTE IS FOR HISTORICAL REFERENCE ONLY. ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note sets out the procedure in force prior to 6 April 2016 for obtaining a charging order, both on an interim and final basis. It also covers registering the interim and final charges before enforcement by way of an order for sale. For guidance on the procedure in force as from 6 April 2016 and the transitional provisions, see Practice Note: Charging orders—what are they and when to use them—CPR 73 and related content. What is a charging order for—pre 6 April 2016? As seen in our Practice Note: Pre-6 April 2016—charging orders—what are they and when to use them [Archived], obtaining a charging order crystallises a debt against the debtor’s asset and protects it until such time as an order for sale of the asset can be obtained and the creditor realise the debt. For guidance on orders for sale, see our Practice Note: Order for sale—how to enforce a charging order. Obtaining

This Practice Note sets out the aims of the Pre-Action Protocol for Housing Condition Cases (England) (the Protocol), in force from 13 January 2020, which applies to residential property situated in England only. It looks at the scope of the Protocol and the potential consequences of failure to comply, the requirement for the parties to consider ADR, the content of the tenant’s letter of claim and the landlord’s response, the instruction of experts, costs, limitation, and the requirement for tenants to allow reasonable access to the property for inspection and repair. The Protocol was previously the Pre-Action Protocol for Housing Disrepair Cases, which has been revised to take into account claims based on a landlord’s implied covenants regarding fitness for human habitation set out in section 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (as amended by section 1 of the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018). Before using the Protocol, the tenant should ensure that its landlord is aware of the poor housing conditions complained of, as the Protocol is intended

This Practice Note sets out the aims of the Pre-Action Protocol for Housing Disrepair Cases (Wales) (the Protocol), in force from 13 January 2020, which applies to residential property situated in Wales. It looks at the scope of the Protocol and the potential consequences of failure to comply, the requirement for the parties to consider ADR, the content of the tenant’s letter of claim and the landlord’s response, the instruction of experts, costs, limitation, and the requirement for tenants to allow reasonable access to the property for inspection and repair. Before using the Protocol, the tenant should ensure that their landlord is aware of the disrepair, as the Protocol is intended for use where the matter remains unresolved, despite the landlord’s knowledge of the disrepair. Scope The Protocol applies to residential property situated in Wales only and relates to claims by tenants and others (such as lessees and members of the tenant’s family) in relation to housing disrepair. It describes the conduct which the court will expect from parties prior to the start of proceedings.

A series of steps which should be undertaken when a dispute arises before litigation is commenced, unless agreed otherwise. Applies to all construction and engineering disputes (including professional negligence claims against architects, engineers and quantity surveyors).

This Practice Note provides guidance upon the application of the Pre-Action Protocol on Media and Communications Claims (the Protocol). It considers when the Protocol applies, its aims, content, the general consequences of non-compliance and the relationship between the Protocol and limitation. The Protocol replaced the Pre-Action Protocol for Defamation Claims. For information on how the Protocol differs from the Pre-Action Protocol for Defamation Claims, see News Analysis: Pre-Action Protocol for Media and Communications Claims. As well as applying to defamation claims, the Protocol also applies to various other types of media and communications claims that, prior to 2019, were not previously subject to a specific pre-action protocol. It was a part of a number of changes to media and communications rules that came into effect on 1 October 2019 and included a new CPR 53 and new practice direction. For further information on these changes, see News Analysis: New rules for media and communications claims from 1 October 2019. This Practice Note therefore considers the following issues: • what the Protocol is

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note was archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note provides a summary of noteworthy convictions brought under the pre-Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010) corruption regime with brief cases details. For information on the scope and territorial reach of pre-BA 2010 corruption offences, as well as information on current corruption investigations and practical insight on how such prosecutions are progressed, see Practice Notes: • Corruption and common law bribery—pre-Bribery Act 2010 [Archived], and • Pre BA 2010 bribery and corruption—Practicalities [Archived] For information on the current regime which applies under BA 2010, see Practice Notes: • The Bribery Act 2010—an introductory guide • Failure to prevent bribery—the offence • Active bribery, passive bribery and bribing foreign public officials • Bribery Act 2010—sentence tracker Corruption sentence tracker This tracker provides a summary of noteworthy convictions brought under the pre-BA 2010 corruption regime. Case Offences Sentencing R v GPT Special Project Management (not reported by LexisNexis®) Corruption contrary to section 1 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906 (PCA 1906) Following

It has become commonplace to hold a pre-inquest review hearing (PIR) or several if deemed necessary to ensure the case is managed efficiently and to resolve any evidential issues which may occur. Rule 6 of the Coroners (Inquests) Rules 2013, SI 2013/1616 (CIR 2013) gives the coroner statutory authority to hold a PIR 'at any time during the course of an investigation'. If the coroner does not take the initiative to arrange one, those representing the interested persons (IPs) should call for a PIR to be listed. The Chief Coroner’s guidance states that PIRs should be held in complex investigations. The function of a PIR is comparable to a case management conference in civil litigation or a plea and trial preparation hearing in the Crown Court. For information on preparing for an inquest, see Practice Note: How to prepare for an inquest. PIRs should be held in public and details should be published in advance on the coroner or local authority website to ensure any member of the public who wishes to attend may do so. Typical

The pre-accession strategy refers to a plan which is formulated as framework for the accession process of each candidate state.

This is the period prior to proceedings being issued.

Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court held that an insurer’s pre-action admission of liability made through its loss adjusters in 2022 bound the insured defendant. The court rejected arguments that the admission was made on a without prejudice basis or that it could be withdrawn without the court’s permission under the pre-October 2023 version of CPR 14. Applying the post-October 2023 provisions, the court refused permission to withdraw the admission and granted the claimant summary judgment on liability. The decision is significant for its treatment of historic pre-action admissions following the 2023 amendments to CPR 14 as well as providing guidance on the effect of insurer-led admissions and the interpretation of conduct of defence clauses.

This Practice Note considers CPR 14, which deals with admissions, and in particular CPR 14.3 which concerns admissions made under the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents (the RTA Protocol), the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury (Employers’ Liability and Public Liability) Claims (the EL/PL Protocol) or the Pre-Action Protocol for Personal Injury Claims Below the Small Claims Limit in Road Traffic Accidents (the RTA Small Claims Protocol). Historic versions of CPR 14 and CPR PD 14 The CPR provisions relevant to admissions were amended with effect from 1 October 2023. In particular, CPR 14 was revised extensively and Practice Direction 14 was deleted. Judgments which pre-date the amendments coming into force on 1 October 2023 may therefore include reference to the old provisions and numbering and should be approached with some caution in light of the changes made. For further information, see: • LNB News 17/07/2023 62—Civil Procedure (Amendment No 3) Rules 2023 • LNB News 18/07/2023 98–157th and 158th Practice Direction and Pre-Action Protocol