Where there is a failure to abide by the information and consultation provisions under Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE 2006), SI 2006/246, a claim may be brought for compensation. Specifically, a claim for failure to comply with a requirement under TUPE 2006, SI 2006/246, reg 13 or 14 is brought under TUPE 2006, SI 2006/246, reg 15(1). Where the complaint is well founded, the tribunal: • must make a declaration, and • may award compensation to be paid to the affected employees The sum awarded is such amount as the tribunal thinks is just and equitable having regard to the seriousness of the failure of the employer to comply with its duty, up to a maximum of 13 weeks' pay per affected employee. The sanction for a failure to inform or consult under TUPE 2006 works in a similar

This Q&A describes red flag indicators for matters involving virtual assets, as set out in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) report ‘Virtual Assets Red Flag Indicators of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing’, published September 2020. It also includes information and guidance taken from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Sectoral Risk Assessment—Anti-money laundering and terrorist financing, published March 2024, and the Legal Sector Affinity Group (LSAG) AML Guidance for the Legal Sector 2023. While virtual assets (VAs) are still not widely used by the public, their use has caught on among criminals. These indicators are specific to the nature of VAs and their associated financial activities, and are not exhaustive. Suspicious activities involving the use of VAs may also share similar traits with money laundering or terrorist financing activities involving the use of traditional (fiat) currency, or other kinds of assets. You should therefore consider the risks posed by your customers/clients, products, services and operations,

Movement restrictions During the emergency period, no person may leave or remain outside the place where they were living without ‘reasonable excuse’. The list of reasonable excuses set out in regulation 6(2) of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020, SI 2020/350, (which is probably non-exhaustive, given the wording ‘includes…’) is detailed and sets out a wide range of potential reasonable excuses, which include: • to obtain basic necessities, including food and medical supplies for those in the same household or for vulnerable persons and supplies for the essential upkeep, maintenance and functioning of the household, or the household of a vulnerable person

Freedom of Information regime The Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FIA 2000) grants a right of access to information held by public authorities. This general right is referred to as the ‘right to know’. The right to know is comprised of two parts; the right to be informed in writing whether information requested is held by the authority, and if so the right for the requester to have that information communicated to them. See Practice Note: Introduction to freedom of information for general information on rights and duties under the freedom of information (FOI) regime. Our Practice Note: Who is subject to the freedom of information regime provides information on those public authorities that are subject to the FOI regime. FIA 2000, Sch 1 lists a number of bodies which it classifies as public authorities for this purpose (authorities). Our Practice Note: Compliance with a freedom of information request provides the key points for

The TCC decision in the case of Amey Birmingham Highways Ltd v Birmingham City Council provides clear guidance to parties on drafting statements of agreed facts, which should: • rarely involve reference to the source documents behind the agreed facts • be limited to the material facts as alleged in the pleadings, and • not deal in detail with issues of admissibility or relevance Amey—the facts In a claim concerning the construction of a contract, the parties were unable to agree the terms of one paragraph of a case management order made by the court following a hearing. The parties therefore sought further directions from the

The contents of the order are prescribed. The order must contain: • identification details for the proceedings • the date of the filing (or presentation) of the bankruptcy petition • the name, postal

If the court orders a change of carriage, the order must contain: • identification details for the proceedings • the date of the hearing of the bankruptcy petition • the name of the person who is willing to be given carriage of the bankruptcy petition (the relevant person) • a

The default position is that notice of a winding-up petition should be given. See Re A Company (not reported by LexisNexis®, ChD, Tim Kerr QC, 13 November 2014). Under Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016, SI 2016/1024, r 7.24, it is possible for a company to apply to the court to restrain a creditor from giving notice of a winding-up petition. An application by a company

The Court of Appeal has stated that for restraint of the presentation of a winding-up petition the court must be provided with prima facie evidence that the company would succeed in establishing that the proceedings would amount to an abuse of process. It is well established that the threshold for establishing that a debt is disputed on substantial grounds in the context of a winding-up petition is not a high one for restraining the presentation of a winding-up petition and may be reached even if the defence could be regarded to be ‘shadowy’. The lack of locus standi of the would-be petitioner serves as justification for the exercise of the court's jurisdiction to restrain the presentation of a petition as an abuse of

Information on the discharge of planning conditions can be found in Practice Note: Planning conditions—key points. There is no prescribed form of condition discharge notice and Article 27 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, SI 2015/595, which governs applications for the discharge of conditions,

In the case of an unlimited company with a share capital, the procedure for selling and purchasing such a company would be the same as for a private limited company with a share capital

Case Study A is the attorney of B under a valid power of attorney. B is the leaseholder of a property. A signs lease extension documents on B’s behalf and arranges for the transfer of the extension payment to B’s solicitor. B dies before the documents and payment are submitted to the property management company that is responsible for B’s property. Attorney’s authority to execute documents An attorney can carry out acts on behalf of the donee of that power as if they were done by the donee. In the scenario above, A is entitled to take steps as if he were B, which would include negotiating and signing lease extension documents. However, the documents and payment have not been submitted to the property management company so as to complete the