How do the Rules differ? CPR 3 and CPR PD 3E set out the key information governing the costs management regime. CPR 3.12 outlines the general rule of when a cost budget is required and a number of exceptions to that rule: ‘(1) This Section and Practice Direction 3E apply to all Part 7 multi-track cases, except— (a) where the claim is commenced on or after 22nd April 2014 and the amount of money claimed as stated on the claim form is £10 million or more; or (b) where the claim is commenced on or after 22nd April 2014 and is for a monetary claim which is not quantified or not fully quantified or is for a non-monetary claim and in any such case the claim form contains a statement that the claim is valued at £10 million or more; or (c) where in proceedings commenced on or after 6th April 2016 a claim is made by

VAT—cross-border goods and services The Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Act 2018 makes provision for the UK to cease being a Member State of the EU and its customs union. However, the Northern Ireland (NI) Protocol to the Withdrawal Agreement provides that NI remains subject to EU VAT rules after IP completion day in relation to the supply of goods. As such, there are three discrete VAT regimes to consider, namely: • the supply of goods between GB and the EU • the supply of goods between NI and either the EU or GB • the supply of services between the UK and the EU Goods—GB Key points for practitioners to consider in respect of the VAT treatment of the supplies of cross-border goods involving GB from IP completion day include: • VAT is imposed on imports of goods from the EU to GB and no UK VAT is charged on exports of goods from GB to the

The court’s power to make an order for sale comes from CPR 73.10C. CPR PD 73, para 4.3 sets out the information that must be included within the application for an order for sale. The court requires details of the following, in addition to basic information regarding the property and charging order: • Details of all creditors and the amount they are owed • An estimate of the price which would be obtained on the sale of the property • If the claim relates to land, details of every person who to the best of the claimant’s knowledge is in possession of the property • If the claim relates to residential property, state whether a Class F land charge or notice under section 31(10) of the Family Law Act 1996 has been registered and on whose behalf Where the debtor owns the property

Under section 123(1) of the Local Government Act 1972 (LGA 1972), principal authorities are entitled to dispose of land held by them 'in any manner they wish'. This includes selling freehold interests, granting or assigning leases and granting easements. However, this general power is limited by the duty in LGA 1972, s 123(2) to achieve

Product labelling Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers (FIC) establishes the general principles, requirements and responsibilities governing food information, and in particular food labelling, across the EU. Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, art 9 provides that all pre-packed foods sold to consumers in packages must contain certain mandatory information including the name or business name and address of the food business operator (FBO), or, if that operator is not established in the EU, the EU importer, and the

The transfer of the legal interest in land (as opposed to solely the beneficial interest) requires certain formalities, even if the transfer is for nil consideration. The transfer must be in writing and HM Land Registry must be informed. Registration should take place at the time of the transfer if the property is unregistered. The transfer takes place by way of Form TR1, which states the details of the transfer and is then registered with HM Land Registry by way of Form AP1. Form ID1 will also need to be completed. We have assumed however that this Q&A is not focussed on these formalities, but rather the practical issues that may arise out of the transfer of the land. It would be sensible for the solicitors for the transferee to obtain the official copy entries for the property prior to the transfer to confirm that the transferor actually has title and that there are no encumbrances

Material change of use National planning policy and guidance provide no guidance as to whether mooring a boat to a riverbank is a material change of use for the purposes of section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990). However, case law suggests that a long-term residential mooring is likely to constitute a material change of use and therefore require planning permission, if the moored boat is to be used as the occupant's sole or primary residence. In R(KP JR Management Company Ltd) v London Borough of Richmond & Kew Marine Ltd, the claimant challenged the local planning authority’s (LPA) decision to issue a lawful development certificate for the mooring of six residential houseboats at its mooring. The High Court granted permission to bring judicial review but dismissed the claim, holding that: • in accordance with Thames Heliports Plc v London Borough of Tower Hamlets, even if there

We assume you are referring to the recent judgments in the Parking Eye and El Makadesi cases. Drafting and negotiating a liquidated damages clause—checklist outlines key provisions and issues for consideration when drafting and negotiating liquidated damages clauses. Since the ParkingEye and Makdessi cases, the courts must follow a new, broader test of the rule against penalties (ParkingEye v Beavis; Cavendish v El Makdessi [2015] UKSC 67). If the purpose of the payment is 'extravagant, exorbitant and unconscionable' and no legitimate interest is being served then it is likely to be a penalty. The rule against penalties hasn’t been abolished altogether but it has been given an adjustment: a clause will only be a penalty if it is out of all proportion

This Q&A assumes that the question relates to a business-to-business contract. An obligation to pay a sum due under a contract is discharged when payment is made in accordance with the terms of the agreement. For guidance on interpreting contracts, see: Contract interpretation—overview. Matters which may be specifically addressed in the contract include: • the time for payment, which could be a specific

In this Q&A, ‘IP’ is taken to mean intellectual property and ‘practitioner’ is taken to mean insolvency practitioner. The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA 2020) introduced new legislation from 26 June 2020 to protect or ensure the continuation of the supply of goods and services to a company that is subject to an insolvency procedure, including liquidation, administration, voluntary arrangement and the new moratorium. The aim of the legislation is to ensure that the suppliers of goods and services cannot terminate contacts for the supply of these goods and services just because the company is subject to an insolvency procedure. These provisions are known as ‘ipso facto’ clauses and have been introduced into the Insolvency

Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 The object of the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020 (CIGA 2020) was to avoid insolvency and assist businesses to continue operating during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and ensuing economic uncertainty. The UK government published the Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill on 20 May 2020. It went through the accelerated Parliamentary process and received the Royal Assent on 25 June 2020. The main parts of CIGA 2020 consist of the following: • a new moratorium whereby the formal insolvency process is suspended • a new restructuring plan for companies in financial difficulty whereby a company and its creditors (and/or members) can agree a plan for the purpose of reducing, preventing or mitigating its financial difficulties • a prohibition on the issue of statutory demands and winding up petitions relating to debts arising from coronavirus • suspension of

Termination for insolvency Most typical franchise agreements involve the provision of support by the franchisor to the franchisee and will have a clause which gives the franchisor a right upon the insolvency of the franchisee to automatically or by notice bring the franchise agreement (and likewise the franchisors obligations to continue supporting such franchisee) to an end. In such circumstances, unless able to fall within an exemption, the franchisor will (subject to the small entity exemption) be unable to enforce its termination clause against the franchisee and will need to instead rely on other provisions in the agreement that might assist to manage risk or bring the contract to an end. For example,