What is a special manager? Origin of the role of the special manager Before the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) came into force, the official receiver (OR) had the power under the Companies Act 1985 (CA 1985, s 556, in force at the time) to apply to court for the appointment of a special manager over a company’s business or property. This procedure was used where the OR considered that, because of some special feature of the company’s business or property, it was in the interests of the creditors that a person with a particular expertise be appointed to manage the business or property. IA 1986 broadened the scope of the power to appoint a special manager significantly. It is now possible for the application to be made in corporate and personal insolvencies. Special managers under IA 1986 Broadly, a special manager is an individual with particular skills or expertise not generally possessed by the relevant office-holder. They are appointed by the court to assist an office-holder to deal

Since 30 June 2016, companies (and LLPs) must provide information to the registrar in relation to their people with significant control register (PSC register). For further information see Practice Note: PSC register—the people with significant control regime. For companies incorporated on or after 30 June 2016, a statement of initial significant control must be delivered to the registrar. This document must

What is statement of reasons? A party entering into a CFA with a legal representative can agree to pay a success fee in the event of the claim being successful. Prior to the Jackson Reforms, the success fee could be recovered from the paying party, regardless of the type of claim in dispute, although it was subject to court assessment which would consider whether the success fee had been set at a reasonable level given the facts and circumstances known to the legal representative at the time the CFA was entered into. Where it was considered that

Statutory declaration of solvency A company enters voluntary liquidation when its members vote to do so by a special resolution. For further information, see Practice Note: What is a members’ voluntary liquidation and when is it typically used? Before the members can vote on a resolution, the directors of the company must assess whether the company can pay its debts in full, together with interest at the official rate (defined in section 251 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986)), within no more than 12 months from the commencement of the winding-up. If the company can do this, it can be placed into members’ voluntary liquidation (MVL). If it cannot, it should enter creditors’ voluntary liquidation (CVL). For further information, see Checklist: Directors' due diligence questionnaire and guidance before swearing a statutory declaration of solvency for a members' voluntary liquidation. The statutory declaration of solvency required by IA 1986, s 89 to place a company into MVL is a formal declaration

This Practice Note looks at what a statutory demand is and what it seeks to achieve in both corporate and personal insolvency. It assumes that the debtor is based in England and Wales. The statutory demand—the general position A statutory demand (in both corporate and personal insolvency) is a demand for a debt—either payable now, or payable at some future date—which is served on the debtor by one or more of their creditors. In both corporate and personal insolvency, failure by the debtor to pay the debt within 21 days of service of the statutory demand, satisfy/secure it to the creditor's satisfaction, or take the appropriate steps to prevent the creditor from acting further on it, will create a presumption of insolvency (on an inability to pay basis) of the debtor. Where the debtor is an individual, an unsatisfied statutory demand provides a creditor with one of only two grounds upon which a creditor's bankruptcy petition may be issued—or 'presented'—against an individual. Although a statutory demand should contain the prescribed matters set out in the relevant

A statutory demand (in both corporate and personal insolvency) is a demand for a debt, either payable now, or payable at some future date, which is served on the debtor by one or more of their creditors. The purpose of the statutory demand is to establish that the debtor is unable to pay their/its debts and is therefore insolvent. The basic requirements of statutory demands are that they should only be served on the debtor

What is a systematic internaliser? A firm will be a systematic internaliser (SI) if it deals on own account on a substantial (as well as organised, frequent and systematic) basis when executing client orders outside a UK regulated market (RM), UK multilateral trading facility (MTF) or UK organised trading facility (OTF). The definition of SIs applies only where a firm's over-the-counter (OTC) trading meets quantitative thresholds for both 'frequent and systematic' and 'substantial': • the 'frequent and systematic' threshold is based on the number of OTC trades in the financial instrument carried out by the firm on own account when executing client orders • the 'substantial' threshold is based on either: (i) the size of the OTC trading carried out by the firm in relation to its total trading in a specific financial instrument or (ii) the size of the firm's OTC trading carried out by the investment firm in relation to the total trading in the relevant area (within

BREXIT: As of 31 January 2020, the UK is no longer an EU Member State, but has entered an implementation period during which it continues to be treated by the EU as a Member State for many purposes. As a third country, the UK can no longer participate in the EU’s political institutions, agencies, offices, bodies and governance structures (except to the limited extent agreed), but the UK must continue to adhere to its obligations under EU law (including EU treaties, legislation, principles and international agreements) and submit to the continuing jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union in accordance with the transitional arrangements in Part 4 of the Withdrawal Agreement. For further reading, see: Brexit—introduction to the Withdrawal Agreement. This has an impact on this Q&A. For guidance, see Practice Note: Brexit—impact on finance transactions [Archived]—Brexit planning and impact—key issues for debt capital markets transactions. A

• Is the tenant liable for the costs of both dilapidations schedules? • What are the implications of the freehold being sold before the dilapidations have been settled? For the purposes of this Q&A, we have assumed the claim is a terminal dilapidations claim rather than one during the lease term. Can the landlord (or successive landlords) require the tenant to pay for two schedules of dilapidations where the lease provides for this cost to be recovered? Subject to the landlord’s right to recover the costs of preparation and service of schedules of dilapidations (see below), there is no reason in principle why the landlord and/or their successor (assuming the benefit of the repairing covenant has passed to them—see below) should not be able

Our Q&A My client was a tenant under a lease for a term of ten years that was contracted out. They have been in occupation for a further year since the lease should have expired. The landlord only began corresponding with my client with a view to formalising the current arrangement and negotiating terms of occupation eight months following the lease term expiration date. The rent was payable in advance, for a peppercorn (if demanded). No rent has been paid or demanded. Under LTA 1954, s 43(3) leases less than six months cannot have security of tenure. Can I infer that anything beyond six months automatically affords my client such security? What duration of occupation is required for a periodic tenancy to be established

This Practice Note explains what a third party debt order (TPDO) (previously known as a garnishee order) is as a means of enforcing a judgment debt, with reference to CPR 72. The order directs a third party who owes money to the judgment debtor to pay that money instead to the judgment creditor. It considers when a TPDO may be ordered, what they can cover and their effect. For guidance on the relevant procedure, see Practice Note: How to apply for a third party debt order (TPDO). What is a third party debt order (TPDO)? TPDOs were previously known as 'garnishee' orders and have been part of the court’s enforcement powers since the nineteenth century under various incarnations of the rules of procedure. .Case law concerning garnishee orders, decided prior to the inception of CPR 72.1, remains relevant, but will be applied, in respect of procedural matters, subject to the overriding objective for the court to deal with cases justly in accordance with CPR 1.2. A TPDO is a method of enforcement

This Practice Note provides an introduction to tort law by addressing three questions: • what does the concept of being liable in tort mean? And how does tort relate to contract and criminal law • how has the law of tort developed? • what is the scope of tort, ie what interests does it protect? What conduct does it allow or punish? What impact has the Human Rights Act 1998 had on tort law, particularly calls for a general tort of privacy? What is tort law? The word 'tort' comes indirectly from the Latin term ‘tortus’, which means crooked or twisted—in other words, wrong. It therefore makes sense that a ‘tort’ is a civil wrong that occurs where someone unfairly causes another person to suffer loss or harm. A person committing a tort is legally liable to the party injured, who is provided with a remedy in law, such as monetary damages or an injunction to compel or prevent certain conduct. An injured party who decides to pursue the matter in court is known as