Title to land may be acquired by adverse possession in certain circumstances. The owner of unregistered land who has been dispossessed by another person (usually referred to as the 'squatter') has (generally) 12 years from the date on which they were dispossessed within which to bring an action to recover possession of the land from the squatter. If they do not do so, their title to the land is extinguished and title is acquired by the squatter, who can then apply for first registration. For full details and practical guidance on claiming adverse possession of unregistered land see Practice

The first thing to consider is whether the employee is receiving statutory sick pay (SSP) only, under the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 (SSCBA 1992) and the Statutory Sick Pay (General) Regulations 1982 (SSP (General) Regs 1982), SI 1982/894, or contractual sick pay (sometimes known as occupational sick pay), as the position regarding entitlement to contractual sick pay may be different to that for entitlement to SSP. All employees, with certain exceptions, are entitled to receive SSP from their employers. The essential qualification requirements for SSP are that an employee must: • be an employee as defined and not fall within one of the excluded categories • be too ill to undertake any work under their contract of employment on any day for which they claim SSP, or be deemed to be so • have at least four consecutive days'

The starting point is to note that, when the land to which the option agreement relates is sold, the burden of positive covenants contained in the option agreement do not pass with the land, only the benefit of any positive covenants. However, such benefit does not pass automatically. See Practice Note: Positive covenants—binding successors in title for further detail. It is not clear from this Q&A whether the option agreement has been protected by virtue of a notice on the title. The case of Ridgewood Properties Group v Valero Energy

This Q&A assumes that the contract is a generic business to business supply contract which is not otherwise subject to sector or industry specific regulation. This Q&A further assumes that either company B has never existed, or that there may be an inconsistency between the identity of the company named in the contract and the identity of the company performing the contract. As such, see Practice Notes: • Mistake

Specified duration of LLP The status of a limited liability partnership (LLP) following the specified date of expiry of the term of the LLP will depend upon the drafting of the LLP agreement, the intention of the members and what has been agreed between them. Where an LLP has a limited duration set out in the LLP agreement, it is common for the LLP agreement to provide that the members may agree to extend the term for an additional fixed or indefinite period. By way of example, see Commentary: Duration clause for LLP agreement—fixed term LLP: Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents

The information available on Lexis+® UK and Lexis+ UK Legal Research is based on the laws of England and Wales and it may be prudent to refer to a local advisor in Scotland for further guidance on Scottish law. Scottish courts, like English courts, have traditionally been reluctant to recognise a doctrine of good faith in the performance of contracts, leaving it to the parties to impose an express obligation of good faith if they wish to do so. However Smith v Bank of Scotland marked a change in attitude towards good faith in Scotland. In that case, the House of Lords recognised the obligation of a creditor

On 13 March 2020, the Law Society issued guidance in respect of residential conveyancing transactions in light of coronavirus. It is suggested that there is unlikely to be a drafting solution appropriate to every case, and exchanging contracts on a ‘business as usual’ basis may be preferable to using new provisions, but it is up to individual conveyancers to make this assessment. It is further stated that if completion does not take place after contracts have been exchanged, as a result of coronavirus, this will amount to a default and the relevant contractual provisions

Financial provision orders in connection with divorce are governed by section 23 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973). Correspondingly, property adjustment orders are governed by MCA 1973, s 24. Each of the two sections refers to orders being made inter alia in favour of a 'child of the family'. A child of the family is in turn defined by MCA 1973, s 52(1)(b), where the child is not a child of both of the parties, as any other child, not being a child who is placed with those parties as foster parents by a local authority or voluntary organisation, who has been treated by both of those parties as a child of the family. A foster child could not therefore be a child of the family within the scope of this definition. However, a child who is the

The first issue here is who has the benefit of the covenant. The Q&A suggests that on a transfer of the lease of a flat the tenant must resign the membership of the management company, which no doubt provides services, and must procure that the new tenant becomes a member of the management company. It does not make it at all clear that the intention of the lease was that the covenant in that regard was to be enforceable by the management company as opposed to the freeholder, but assuming it was the management company, the question is whether the covenant

A co-operative society or community benefit society (registered society) may, by special resolution, convert into a company limited by shares or by guarantee under section 112(1) of the Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Act 2014 (CCBSA 2014). The use of the term ‘conversion’ is indicative of the fact that the process does not involve the creation of a new entity, but rather a change in its corporate form. This is underlined by CCBSA 2014, s 114(3) which provides that conversion does not affect any right or claim for the time being subsisting against the society and CCBSA 2014, s 114(4) which provides that for the purpose of enforcing any such right, claim or penalty, the society may be sued and proceeded against in the same way as if it had not become registered as a company. CCBSA 2014, s 114(5) further provides that any such right or claim has priority against

Restrictions on forfeiture During the ‘relevant period’ of 26 March 2020 to 25 March 2022 in England and Wales, section 82 of the Coronavirus Act 2020 provides that there is a prohibition on a landlord taking steps to forfeit a ‘relevant business tenancy’ on the grounds of non-payment of rent and other sums falling due under the lease. See Practice Note: Coronavirus (COVID-19)—implications for property [Archived], in particular section: Restrictions on forfeiture of commercial tenancies—CA 2020, s 82. Note that the provisions of the Commercial Rent (Coronavirus) Bill (the Bill) will affect a landlord’s ability to utilise some of the remedies for recovery of certain outstanding rent, service charge, value added tax and interest during

On 20 July 2022 (L-Day), the government released a policy paper ‘Capital Gains Tax: separation and divorce’, accompanied by draft legislation. Under these proposals, the capital gains tax (CGT) position for separating couples would change so that transfers between spouses would be made on a ‘no gain, no loss’ basis if they occur: • within three years following the year in which separation