For the purposes of this Q&A, we assume you are referring to a guarantee executed as a deed which is not subject to specific sector or industry regulation. Execution requirements for a guarantee To create an effective guarantee, an offer, acceptance with the intention to create legal relations and sufficient certainty of terms are needed. This is because guarantees are contractual arrangements, and must comply with the usual principles of contract formation. It should be noted that in a guarantee, consideration must move from the guaranteed party rather than from the guarantor. It is not necessary for the consideration to be in writing or set out in the guarantee document. For more information, see Practice Note: Formalities for creating a guarantee. A guarantee must be in writing to be enforceable (Maddison v Alderson). It must also be signed by the guarantor or some other person lawfully authorised to sign on the guarantor's behalf. However, as with any contractual arrangement, execution by deed overrides the

Where a company has a seal and it is being utilised, practitioners must ensure that it complies with the relevant section of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). However, note that not all companies have a company seal and even companies that do have seals are not obliged to execute simple documents under seal. CA 2006, s 45(2) further states that company seals are required to have the company's name clearly and legibly inscribed on them. Failure to comply with this requirement results in a criminal offence being committed by the company and each of its officers (CA 2006, s 45(3)). Where execution using the company

The grant of a new tenancy to a current tenant implies at law the surrender of the current tenancy. A surrender by operation of law is deemed to have taken place (Dodd v Acklom). Consequently,

The Companies Act 2006 codifies most, but not all, of the duties imposed on directors by case law and equitable principles. There are seven general statutory duties:

We have assumed that the matter is not proceeding in the Commercial Court—different rules apply in relation to applications in this court. Putting respondents on notice of applications In civil proceedings before the courts in England and Wales, applications are initiated by the applicant filing an application notice (usually, Form N244). Generally, applications are governed by the procedural rules set out in CPR Part 23 and CPR PD 23A. See Practice Note: How to make an application for a court order (CPR 23). The application notice should state the applicant's full name and (if not a party already) their address for service—see Practice Note: Serving documents (excluding the claim form, particulars of claim and defence)—Address for service (CPR 6.23). The general rule is that applications should be served on the other parties, although there are exceptions (CPR 23.4). See also Practice Note: Applications without notice at section When an application can be without notice. One of the exceptions

Environment analysis: In this News Analysis, Jackson Sirica and Dr Lois Lane (tenants at Cornerstone Barristers) provide an update on the government’s consultations ahead of expected changes to the Energy Performance Certificate regime.

Removal of a trustee The trustee of a bankrupt's estate may be removed from office by an order of the court or by a decision of the creditors made by a decision procedure instigated specially for that purpose (section 298(1) of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986)) or, if they have been appointed by the Secretary of State (SoS), by a direction given by the SoS (IA 1986, s 298(5)). For further guidance, see Commentary: • Removal of trustee: Schaw Miller and Bailey Personal Insolvency Law and Practice [13.58]–[13.62] • Vacation in office of trustee in bankruptcy: Atkin’s Court Forms [369]—the various steps for the removal of a trustee are outlined from steps 7 to 16 • Removal of trustee; vacation of office: Insolvency Legislation: Annotation and Commentary [1.352] Removal of a trustee—by creditors’ decision procedure Where the bankrupt's creditors decide

Under section 127 of the Insolvency Act 1986, any dispositions of property made by a company after the commencement of a winding-up are void. A winding-up of a company by the court commences upon the presentation of the petition. It is therefore necessary to apply to the court for a validation order if a petition is presented. If a company wishes to continue to trade or dispose of an asset after the presentation of a petition, it is necessary to apply for a prospective validation order because if an order is made on the hearing

We have focused on judicial review in the High Court in England and Wales. Having conducted a comprehensive search of our resources on this subject, we refer you to the following guidance, which may be helpful for your purposes. Grounds for judicial review Traditionally, the courts have refused to resolve factual disputes or enter into the substantive merits of the decisions of public bodies. Rather, its traditional function is to ensure only that those decisions were lawful, procedurally fair and rational, (see Council for Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service). The classic grounds for judicial review are illegality, irrationality and procedural unfairness. However, it has been said that the key purpose of judicial review is to prevent the abuse or misuse of public power (see R v North and East Devon Health Authority, ex parte Coughlan, paras 69 and 81), and as such the grounds upon which a claim may be brought continue to evolve. The main grounds for judicial review are: • illegality—this means simply that

The court may grant an application to set aside a statutory demand if: • the debtor has a counterclaim, set-off or cross-demand in an amount which equals or exceeds the debt • the debt is disputed on substantial grounds • the creditor is a secured creditor who has not waived their security or the court is satisfied that the value of the security equals or exceeds the full amount of the debt. Promontoria (Chestnut) Ltd v Bell clarifies that third party

Although it is inevitably a question of construing the terms of the lease, it is not uncommon to find that the tenant is obliged to keep the interior of premises in repair, while the landlord has that duty in respect of the exterior of it. This is particularly likely to be the case where the premises are one part of a larger building held by the landlord in circumstances where there are a number of tenants, none of whom are granted a demise of the exterior part of it. As the landlord’s covenant to keep the premises in repair is in the nature of a contractual obligation, the remedy for a breach of it is to put the tenant in the position which

The number of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) or drones being purchased by recreational and commercial users has grown exponentially in recent years, as have the uses for which these drones have been put. Whilst businesses seek to uncover new ways in which they can harness the potential benefits of this new technology, the proliferation of these aircraft in our skies has led to increasing concerns around public safety. There is also recognition that these aircraft are open to use in ways which could amount to nuisance, invasion of privacy and trespass. This Q&A looks at the various methods of deliberately and forcibly removing a drone from the sky, and the more immediate and likely causes of action, rights, remedies and liabilities arising in connection with the same. However, please note that a full scale analysis of all possible causes of action and remedies is outside the scope of this