Strike out The court has the power to strike out a statement of case, in whole or in part, under CPR 3.4. This may be either on the application of one of the parties to the proceedings or on its own initiative. One of the grounds for striking out is a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or order (CPR 3.4(2)(c)). For further information, see commentary in Judgment without trial after striking out: Halsbury's Laws of England [532]. CPR 26.3(7A) deals with the consequences of failing to comply with the court's notice of proposed allocation. This could be, among other things, a failure to file

The formal requirements for signing a Will are found in section 9 of the Wills Act 1837 (WA 1837). The Will must: • be in writing • be signed by the testator or by some other person in their presence and by their direction • give the appearance that the testator intended by their signature to give effect to the Will • have a signature made or acknowledged by the testator in the presence of two or more witnesses present at the same time • be witnessed and each witness must attest and sign the Will or acknowledge their signature, in the presence of the testator (but not necessarily in the presence of any other witness) See Practice Note: Requirements for a valid Will for further guidance. In writing At the moment, no alternative to the requirement that a Will be in writing is available. For example, oral or video recorded (audio or audio-visual) statements

As this Q&A has identified, a personal representative (PR) must assent to transfer assets to beneficiaries entitled under the testator’s Will. This applies to copyright and royalties. Subject to any contrary intention in the Will, the assent should, in addition to copyrights and royalties of which the PRs are aware, include all others that the deceased may have owned but of which they may not be aware, together with all other rights and benefits that may accrue from them. In contrast to the assent of land for example, no particular formalities are required for the transfer of the underlying intellectual property rights to a beneficiary entitled under the testator’s Will. However, it is usually advisable for the transfer

Section 173(2) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988) provides: (2) ‘Where copyright (or any aspect of copyright) is owned by more than one person jointly, references in this Part to the copyright owner are to all the owners, so that, in particular, any requirement of the licence of the copyright owner requires the licence of all of them.’ Assignment All

Where the company is to make an administrator appointment, it can do so by way of a resolution of shareholders at a general meeting by ordinary

Where the directors are to make the administrator appointment, they can act by a simple majority. There is no need for a formal resolution, but a record

Contractual provisions The first thing to consider in this scenario is whether or not the contract addresses this situation. If there are any express provisions within the agreement that deal with the situation where a party to the agreement changes

The people with significant control (PSC) regime applies to UK incorporated companies limited by shares or guarantee (including community interest companies), LLPs, unlimited companies, unregistered companies, SEs and eligible Scottish partnerships (SLPs and SQPs). It also applies to dormant companies. These entities are required to identify and record the people who own or control their enterprise in a PSC register (except eligible Scottish partnerships which are not required to keep a PSC register but are required to deliver PSC information to Companies House for the central register). The requirement to maintain a PSC register does not currently apply to other 'non-corporate' entities, such as limited partnerships in England & Wales, co-operative or community benefit societies, Royal Charter organisations, charitable trusts, or charitable incorporated organisations (CIOs). From 26 June 2017 all reporting entities are required to update their own registers within 14 days, and to update the information held on the central register at Companies House within a further 14 days. This is a significant change from the

Set-off is the discharge of reciprocal monetary obligations where one monetary amount is discharged to the extent of the other monetary amount. There are five main types of set-off: • independent set-off (sometimes known as legal set-off or statutory set-off). This operated as a procedural defence which used to set-off reciprocal claims that are independent or unconnected. See Practice Note: Independent set-off and transaction set-off • transaction set-off (also known as equitable set-off): when two claims are so closely connected that it would be unjust allow one party to enforce its claim without giving credit to the claim of the other party • contractual set-off is a right of set-off that has been created by an express contractual agreement. It is used when contracting parties want to extend or limit set-off rights which are

Applying for litigation funding can be time-consuming for clients and their legal advisers, but presenting a funding application in a funder-friendly format can speed up the application process. The table below is intended to help applicants by providing a checklist of the key factors that most third party funders will expect to be addressed. These are divided into three categories: Recovery Funders are commercial businesses that ordinarily only make a return upon the actual receipt of payment from the defendant(s). Applicants should consider and identify any enforcement risks and discuss these with the funder at the outset. Appetite for enforcement risk varies from funder to funder. However, if a funder is not comfortable with the path to recovery it is unlikely to fund the claim, regardless of the merits and quantum. As such, where there are material recovery risks, applicants should set out a recovery plan, even if only preliminary. This will assist a funder in ascertaining whether the claim is, at first sight, fundable. Financials Funders treat legal claims as an asset class. As

This Q&A considers whether it is possible within a special guardianship order (SGO) to ensure that a special guardian who is living in Wales is provided with funding for child care for a child who was previously living in England. In England, all children of 3–4 years old and some children of 2–4 years old are eligible for 15 hrs per week of free childcare—see the government guidance here. Under the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989), local authorities have an obligation to make arrangements for the provision of support for special guardians. The support may be either counselling, advice and information or such other services, including financial support as are prescribed by regulation. Which local authority is responsible In order to establish which local authority is responsible for providing support under a SGO, see the section entitled ‘Which local authority has responsibility for providing support?’ in Practice Note: Support for special guardians. Under ChA 1989, s 14F,

The arrangements are those permitted by way of Part II (Contracting Out) of the Deregulation and Contracting Out Act 1994 (DCOA 1994). DCOA 1994, s 70(2) provides that ‘if a minister by order so provides, a function to which this section applies may be exercised by, or by employees of, such person (if any) as may be authorised in that behalf by the local authority whose function it is’. The effect of this section is set out in DCOA 1994, s 72 which provides that the exercise of a function shall be treated for all purposes as done by or in relation