The Enterprise Act 2002, section 94(4) As part of the Enterprise Act 2002 (EnA 2002), the Competition and Markets Authority may accept enforcement undertakings, or if such undertakings are not being fulfilled, it may make an enforcement order. Where a person or company is the subject of an enforcement undertaking or enforcement order, they have a duty to comply with it (EnA 2002, s 94(2)). That duty is ‘owed to any person who may be affected by a contravention of the undertaking or (as the case may be) order’ (EnA 2002, s 94(3)). If the duty is breached

Section 33ZA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (EPA 1990) provides for a penalty notice to be issued and complied with instead of a conviction for an offence contrary to EPA 1990, s 33. If the penalty notice is not complied with, then a prosecution for the offence contrary to EPA 1990, s 33 may be brought. There is no specific provision in EPA 1990 imposing a limitation period within which a prosecution for an offence committed under EPA 1990, s 33 must be brought. This means that the general law on limitation periods for prosecutions applies. The starting

The information contained in this response can be found in Practice Note: Practice and procedure—limitation—contentious trusts and estates. The Practice Note sets out the following: Actions in respect of estates Under Section 22(a) of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), an action against the personal representatives for the recovery of a share or an interest in an estate by an unpaid or underpaid creditor, legatee or next of kin under either a Will or intestacy may not be brought after a period of 12 years after the right of action accrued (subject to LA 1980, s 21(1) and (2)). The Court of Appeal confirmed in Re Loftus that LA 1980, s 22 has no application to an action to remove a personal representative. An important distinction between executors and administrators is that an executor's title to the property in the estate arises at the deceased's death while an administrator's title arises at the date of the grant

This Q&A focuses on the position under the law of England and Wales. The Data Protection Bill is still before Parliament and for the purposes of this reply we have focused on the position under the draft of the Data Protection Bill as amended by public committee and published on 23 March 2018. Q&A: What is the limitation for an individual to enforce a Data Subject Access Request through the courts? which focused on the position under the Data Protection

The concept of ‘knowing receipt’ is an aspect of trust law, and in particular provides for a remedy against those who receive trust property which has been transferred in breach of trust. The remedy lies where the defendant receives the property for their own benefit in circumstances where they have the requisite knowledge that the property was trust property and transferred to them in breach of trust. In such circumstances, it is said that the recipient holds the received property on constructive trust. The question is whether the recipient as such can rely on a defence of limitation for the recovery of that property. The relevant limitation period is contained in section 21 of Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), as follows: ‘(1) No period of limitation prescribed by this Act shall apply to an action

It is the overarching duty of each highway authority to protect the right of the public for the use and enjoyment, and to maintain the safety, of the highway network. In accordance with this general duty, the highway authority is empowered under section 167 of the Highways Act 1980 (HiA 1980). HiA 1980, s 167, provides that unless on land belonging to a transport undertaking, a retaining wall 'wholly or partly within 4 yards of a street...and which is at any point of a greater height than 4 feet 6 inches above the level of the ground at the boundary of the street nearest that point', shall not be erected otherwise than in accordance

In this Q&A we have limited our research to cover limitation periods in respect of agreements and assume a contractual agreement by which A has loaned money to B. We have focussed on any limitation defence B may have to an action brought in 2017 based on an agreement providing for the loan to be repaid in 2008. The limitation period for bringing a claim for breach of contract is: • six years from the date of breach of a 'simple contract' (one which is not under seal or a contract of record) pursuant to section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980, s 5) this includes: ◦ a claim for money had and received

According to section 69(3) of the Care Act 2014 (CA 2014): ‘A sum is recoverable under this section— (a) in a case in which the sum becomes due to the local authority on or after the commencement of this section, within six years of the date the sum becomes due; (b) in any other case, within three

There are two Conventions to consider governing the liability of air carriers for loss, injury and damage sustained in the course of, or arising out of, international air travel. Those are the Warsaw Convention amended by the Hague Protocol in 1955 and the Montreal Convention. To determine which Convention applies: • if both the departure and destination states are signatories to the Montreal Convention, that Convention will be applicable • if one State Party is a signatory to the Montreal Convention and the Warsaw Convention but the other is a signatory only to the Warsaw Convention, the Warsaw Convention will apply • if both State Parties are signatories only to the Warsaw Convention, that Convention will be applicable • if the two State Parties

In the context of a compulsory purchase claim, the period of limitation is six years from the time when the cause of claim for compensation arose. Any reference to the Upper Tribunal must be made within that period (but see below for circumstances in which exceptions to this have been allowed). Care should be taken with regard to any reference to ensure the relevant procedural rules and guidance are complied with (see the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) (Lands Chamber) Rules 2010, SI 2010/2600). Hillingdon London Borough Council v ARC Ltd established that for the purposes of the six-year limitation period imposed by section 9(1) of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), the cause of action for compensation resulting from entry pursuant to section

How is the professional negligence claim being pleaded against the solicitors? Identifying the possible limitation periods that might apply depends on whether you are founding your claim against the solicitors in tort, contract or equity. In most cases there will be a contract between the professional, eg a solicitor, and the client. There may be express or implied terms as to the performance of obligations under the contract and there may be attempts to limit or exclude liability for inadequate performance. Where there has been a failure to perform as required by the contract, a claim in contract will arise. In addition, where a person assumes responsibility to perform professional services for someone who relies on those services, a duty in the tort of negligence to exercise reasonable skill and care arises even if the services are performed under a contract between those parties. Commonly, professional negligence claims against solicitors are pursued on the basis of both breach

Section 19 of the Limitation Act 1980 states that no action shall be brought to recover arrears