Where a solicitor has placed themselves on the court record in accordance with Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 26.2, and subsequently wishes to be removed from the court record, and their client will not provide a notice of change or notice of acting in person, an application may be made to the court under FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 26.3 for an order declaring that that solicitor has ceased to be the solicitor acting for a party. Where an application is made under this rule, FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955,

There is no company or partnership law procedure to convert a general partnership into a company. Although commonly referred to as a ‘conversion’, the procedure will actually be a sale and purchase of the assets of the partnership to a limited company and will involve: • incorporation

One way in which an application for a non-molestation order under section 42 of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996) may be resolved is by way of the respondent giving an undertaking to the court. Pursuant to FLA 1996, s 46, in any case where the court has power to make an occupation order or non-molestation order, the court may accept an undertaking from any party to the proceedings. However, the court shall not accept an undertaking if it appears that the respondent has used or threatened violence against the applicant or a relevant child, and for the protection of the applicant or child it is necessary to make a non-molestation order so that any breach may be punishable under FLA 1996, s 42A (FLA 1996, s 46(3A)). An undertaking should be in Form N117 (general

Guidance relating to service outside England and Wales can be found in Practice Note: Cross-border service—a guide for dispute resolution practitioners. Is court permission needed? When seeking to serve a claim form in Japan, the first consideration is whether the court’s permission is required to serve the claim form. The court’s permission is required unless provisions in CPR 6.33 apply. For guidance, see Practice Note: Cross-border service—is permission required to serve a defendant who is outside England and Wales? Application to the court for permission If permission is required to serve the claim form out of the jurisdiction, the court will consider

The rules about the service of application forms/notices and other documents in family proceedings outside of the jurisdiction of England and Wales, and the procedure for service, are contained in Chapter 4 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 6 (SI 2010/2955, 6.40–6.48). This is supplemented by FPR 2010, PD 6B. FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.41 provides that permission of the court is not required in order to serve documents out of the jurisdiction in family proceedings. The rules regarding the manner in which service should be effected differ depending on where service is intended to take place, and tend to include a longer time limit for acknowledging service. There is a detailed table setting out the different time limits for each country in FPR 2010, PD 6B. FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.43(3) provides that the general rule is that where the applicant wishes to serve a document on a respondent out of

Schedule 10 to the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (LGHA 1989) makes provision in relation to security of tenure on the ending of long residential tenancies. Paragraph 4(1) of Schedule 10—which is entitled ‘Termination of tenancy by the landlord’—states: ‘(1) Subject to sub-paragraph (2) below and the provisions of this Schedule as to the annulment of notices in certain cases, the landlord may terminate a long residential tenancy by a notice in the prescribed form served on the tenant— (a) specifying the date at which the tenancy is to come to an end, being either the term date or a later date; and (b) so served not more than twelve nor less than six months before the date so specified.’ Where a landlord has terminated a long residential tenancy under LGHA 1989, Sch

The first step is to ensure that the penal notice is enforceable. An order may not be enforced under 37.4 of the Family Procedure Rules (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955 (FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 37.4) unless there is a warning to the person required to do or not to do the act in question which is prominently displayed on the front of the order. The warning must be clear that disobedience would be a contempt of court punishable by imprisonment, a fine or sequestration of assets. The wording for a penal notice should be as laid out in FPR 2010, PD 37A, para 1.1 (or in words to similar effect): ‘If you the within-named [ ] do not comply with this order you may be held to be in contempt of court and imprisoned or fined, or your assets may be seized.’ If a person fails to comply with an order to which a penal notice

A non-molestation order or an occupation order, including the power of arrest, can be varied, extended or discharged under section 49 of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996), which provides: ‘(1) An occupation order or non-molestation order may be varied or discharged by the court on an application by— (a) the respondent, or (b) the person on whose application the order was made. (2) In the case of a non-molestation order made by virtue of section 42(2)(b), the order may be varied or discharged by the court even though no such application has been made. (3) If [B's home rights are, under section 31,] are a charge on the estate or interest of the other spouse or of trustees for [A], an order under section 33 against [A] may also be varied or discharged by the court on an application by any person deriving title under [A] or under the trustees and affected by the charge (4) If, by virtue of section 47(3), a power of arrest has

It is sometimes the case that joint executors disagree as to what is in the best interests of the estate. Executors have a duty to act in the best interests of the beneficiaries, but may have differing views as to how this can be achieved. Where there are two or more executors, they must act jointly—it is not open to one of two executors to take unilateral steps in the administration of the estate, and a majority cannot ordinarily override a dissenter. This may be different if there is an express provision in the Will for majority decisions, but this is unlikely. This also means that steps such as service of notices and the commencement

Section 2(1) of the Colonial Probates Act 1892 (CPA 1892) provides that: ‘Where a court of probate in a British possession to which this Act applies has granted probate or letters of administration in respect of the estate of a deceased person, the probate or letters so granted, may, on being produced to, and a copy thereof deposited with, a court of probate in the United Kingdom, be sealed with the seal of that court, and, thereupon, shall be of like force and effect, and have the same operation in the United Kingdom, as if

We have assumed that: • the person is a child under the age 18 but that they will not lack capacity to make decisions when they reach 18 • damages have been recovered following a trial in a personal injury claim We refer you to the resources below in considering this question. CPR 21.11 states: '(1) Where in any proceedings – (a) money is recovered by or on behalf of or for the benefit of a child or protected party; or (b) money paid into court is accepted by or on behalf of a child or protected party, the money will be dealt with in accordance with directions given by the court under this rule and not otherwise. (2) Directions given under this rule may provide that the

The Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 9.26B provides that the court may direct that a person or body be added as a party to proceedings for a financial remedy if: • it is desirable to add the new party so that the court can resolve all the matters in dispute in the proceedings, or • there is an issue involving the third party and an existing party that is connected to the matters in dispute in the proceedings