It is relatively common for employers, particularly larger employers and those that are unionised, to pay redundancy payments to redundant employees which are in excess of the statutory minimum under the statutory redundancy payments scheme. If a contract states that an employee is entitled to a redundancy payment which happens to be more than his statutory entitlement, the statutory entitlement will be included within the contractual amount. If the contract states that the employee is entitled to a contractual

Part 2 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004) makes provision for a house in multiple occupation (HMO) to require a licence. HA 2004, s 61 imposes the legal requirement that an HMO be licensed: ‘(1) Every HMO to which this Part applies must be licensed under this Part unless— (a) a temporary exemption notice is in force in relation to it under section 62, or (b) an interim or final management order is in force in relation to it under Chapter 1 of Part 4. (2) A licence under this Part is a licence authorising occupation of the house concerned by not more than a maximum number of households or persons specified in the licence…’ HA 2004, s 72 creates various offences relating to

The Building Act 1984 (BA 1984) grants various enforcement powers which can be used against a contravention of the Building Regulations 2010, SI 2010/2214. This includes prosecuting, and serving of a compliance

We have assumed that this relates to an offence under section 30(1) of the Housing Act 2004. Where an improvement notice served under Part 1 of the Housing Act 2004 (HA 2004) has become operative, the person on whom the notice was served commits an offence if they fail to comply with the requirements of the notice. A person who commits such an offence is liable on summary conviction to a fine. The offence set out in HA 2004, s 30 is a summary criminal offence and therefore criminal proceedings for committing that offence are heard in the magistrates’ court. The general rule is that prosecutions of summary only offences must be commenced

We would like to refer you to the below content which will be helpful in your research: • Overview:

We have assumed that this question relates to an offence of failure to comply with a hygiene improvement notice issued under the Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013 (FSH(E)R 2013), SI 2013/2996, reg 6 contrary to FSH(E)R 2013, SI 2013/2996, reg 6(2). Under FSH(E)R 2013, SI 2013/2996, reg 6(2) failure to comply with a hygiene improvement

The 18-month time limit specified within section 20B of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 (LTA 1985) relates to backdating any costs which were incurred more than 18 months before a demand for payment, rather than relating to costs incurred after the service of

An application to court under section 64(2) of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) is made by issue and the service of an arbitration claim form. CPR 62.4(2) provides that an applicant must serve the claim form on the defendant within one month from the date the claim is issued at court; and that the applicant must file with the court a certificate of service within seven days of service of the claim form on the defendant (CPR PD 62.4). AA 1996, s 64, however, does not specify when an application under AA 1996, s 64(2) is to be issued or whether the application must be made within a particular time after the arbitrator has ordered the applicant to pay the fees in question. There are also no reported cases in which the application or procedure of AA 1996,

In answering this Q&A, it has been assumed that the lease renewal is unopposed. The LTA 1954 unopposed lease renewal procedure—flowchart sets out the procedure for an unopposed lease renewal. It contains links to a number of Practice Notes, Precedents

Written in partnership with Daniel Simons (Partner, Hogan Lovells International LLP) and Melissa Ratchev (Associate, Hogan Lovells International LLP). This Q&A considers the nature and extent of due diligence required in an AIM or Main Market Initial Public Offering (IPO) and how long such due diligence takes to complete. Why carry out due diligence on an applicant pursuing an AIM or Main Market IPO? The due diligence exercise is a critical part of the IPO process. It requires a full investigation by the company and its advisers into the company's business, finances, prospects and risks in order to provide the necessary information in the offering document (that is, a prospectus where there is an offer to the public or for an admission of securities to trading on the Main Market, or an admission document for an admission of securities to trading on AIM) which will be distributed to potential investors. Sufficient due diligence can lead to a defence

Where a sale is a sale of a business or part of a business and certain conditions are met (for example, the buyer will use the assets in carrying on the same kind of business as the seller) the sale can constitute a transfer of a going concern or TOGC. If a sale is a TOGC, then it is treated as neither a supply of goods nor a supply of services and is outside the scope of value added tax (VAT). For more on TOGCs and when a sale can constitute a TOGC, see Practice Note: VAT—what is a transfer of a business as a going concern? Most of the commentary

Residential developments can involve a range of issues from a value added tax (VAT) perspective. In the most straightforward example, the developer will be acquiring land on which it obtains planning permission, constructs new houses, sells the houses outright, and then dedicates the rest of the site, such as roads, to the local authority. In these circumstances, the construction of the houses will be zero-rated and the sales