The stage of a company's development when it is still developing its products or services, but may not be out in the market selling its products or services.

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: When might claimants obtain a stay of proceedings pending the outcome of related proceedings in another jurisdiction? The Companies Court considered that question in Hosking and another v Apax Partners LLP.

Dispute Resolution analysis: In a recent decision Mr Stephen Houseman KC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered an action for recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment (the ADCC Judgment), together with an application for a freezing order in support of proceedings under way in the Abu Dhabi Court of Cassation. Written by Sarah Prager KC, barrister at Deka Chambers.

What is CPR Part 8? There are in general two ways to issue proceedings: one is by the procedure set out in Part 7 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR); the other is using the alternative procedure in Part 8 of the CPR. This Practice Note is concerned with the latter. A claimant may, unless any enactment, rule or practice direction states otherwise, use the Part 8 procedure to seek ‘the court’s decision on a question which is unlikely to involve a substantial dispute of fact’, such that the question being asked should be capable of being framed with a degree of precision and capable of precise answer. The Part 8 procedure is flexible and can be used for a range of disputes. Litigants may use the procedure where they require the court’s guidance, approval of an agreement or decision or there is a dispute on a matter of law or interpretation of a document or a statute. However, where disputes of construction depend on resolving a factual dispute,

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: A landlord’s winding-up petition for £167,593.41 against a company incorporated to run a school was dismissed. The court found there was a strongly arguable case that the bulk of the petition debt did not represent rent arrears payable, but rather a purchase price payable for shares in the company. The court also accepted, that there was a cross-claim with a real prospect of success in a sum of at least £546,000 in general damages and potentially exemplary damages as well. The company had raised a strongly arguable case that the purported forfeiture of the lease by physical re-entry between the first and second hearing of the petition (causing the abrupt closure of the school) was unlawful. Written by Rebecca Farrell. counsel at 3 Paper Buildings, who appeared for the Company in this matter.

An order for spousal maintenance including an element of support for any child or children where credit is then given for any sums payable under a statutory child maintenance calculation.

The process whereby a number of schemes are set up at the same time to allow the member to draw benefits at different times (phased annuity).

Where the assets of a particular fund are managed independently of those of other funds under the fund manager's control.

THIS PRACTICE NOTE IS FOR HISTORICAL REFERENCE ONLY SINCE, AS FROM 6 APRIL 2014, IT IS NO LONGER POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN A WRIT OF FEIRI FACIAS OR A WARRANT OF EXECUTION; INSTEAD THE PROCESS IS NOW TO ISSUE A WRIT OR WARRANT OF CONTROL UNDER THE TAKING CONTROL OF GOODS (TCG) PROCEDURE UNDER THE TRIBUNALS, COURTS AND ENFORCEMENT ACT 2007, SCHEDULE 12, ON WHICH SEE: Taking control of the debtor's goods—overview. Introduction The mechanisms for enforcing a judgment for the payment of money by seizing a debtor’s goods are set out in: • CCR Order 26 (county court) and RSC Orders 46-47 (High Court) • practice directions PD RSC 46 and CCR 26 • attendant provisions in Schedule 7 of the Courts Act 2003 and Part V of the County Courts Act 1984 Note: amendments intended by Part 3 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 - Overview) will come into force on 6 April 2014. A

ARCHIVED: this archived Practice Note is not maintained and is for background information purposes only. Further, some of the links may not direct you to the provisions as at the date the guidance in this Practice Note was published. NOTE: the information in this Practice Note is relevant only where you have issued a writ of fieri facias or warrant of control before 6 April 2014 and enforcement pursuant to such a writ or warrant has reached one of the following stages: • goods have already been distrained; • goods have already been executed against; or • goods have already been made subject to a walking possession agreement by that date. In such case execution of such writ or warrant continues under the pre 6 April 2014 provisions. However, where you do not meet the above criteria then any execution by taking control of the debtor's goods is subject to the new regime under the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, sch 12; for which see: Taking control

Background—the creation of the powers Chapter 3B, Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002), entitled the ‘Forfeiture of money held in bank and building society accounts’, provides the procedure for the detention and forfeiture of money held in bank accounts. In summary the provisions provide for applications relating to the following: • account freezing orders (AFOs) in respect of monies in bank accounts • applications to vary and discharge AFOs • a streamlined procedure for issuing a forfeiture notice • account forfeiture orders • the participation of victims and other owners • appeals in relation to forfeiture decisions • applications for compensation These applications are dealt with in the magistrates’ court. They are stand-alone proceedings that are separate and independent from any criminal proceedings that may also take place. The procedures for making such applications are governed by Magistrates’ Courts (Freezing and Forfeiture of Money in Bank and Building Society Accounts) Rules 2017, SI 2017/1297. Civil

Lawful authority to seize and retain property (subject to legal professional privilege) following a search of premises can be achieved in a number of different ways including: • with a warrant under section 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984) • without a warrant on or after arrest under PACE 1984, ss 18 and 32 • under a general power of seizure in accordance with PACE 1984, s 19 • by retaining and sifting the property elsewhere under section 50 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (CJPA 2001), and • with the consent of the owner Seizure under a warrant authority Where an investigating authority is in possession of a warrant issued under PACE 1984, s 8 or Sch 1, it should use its seizure powers under the warrant as they are simple, quick and efficient. Possession may be taken of any documents (subject to legal privilege) that appear to fit the description specified in the information supporting the application to the court for a search warrant. See Practice