Fixed enforcement costs are allowed in respect of legal representatives’ costs in specific circumstances of enforcement (Rule 45.8 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998). CPR 45.8 Table 5, sets out these fixed costs. Specifically, it provides for a fixed cost of £110 for the

Chapter II of Part I of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 (LRHUDA 1993) enables a tenant of a flat, in certain circumstances, to acquire a new lease of their flat. LRHUDA 1993, Pt I, Ch II sets out a procedure for the tenant to do so, which is started by the tenant giving a notice containing certain specified information to their landlord under LRHUDA 1993, s 42, including proposed terms for the new lease. A landlord can then serve a counter-notice. If proposed terms of the new lease remain in dispute two months after service of the counter-notice, LRHUDA 1993, s 48 provides that the landlord or tenant may make an application to the appropriate tribunal to determine the matters in dispute. The appropriate tribunal is

When considering whether the documentation submitted in support of an application under the EEA Regulations is acceptable, Home Office caseworkers must follow their published guidance. This guidance tells caseworkers what to consider when assessing an application under the EEA Regulations. Page 37 of Home Office published guidance, ‘Processes and procedures for EEA documentation applications Version 8.0’, explains how Home Office staff should handle photocopies of documents. With regards to ID documents, it confirms: ‘Passports and identity documents must be originals. Copies of these documents should not be accepted, except, in the case of passports

All references to the Court of Protection Rules 2007 (COPR 2007), SI 2007/1744 in this Q&A are to COPR 2007 as amended by the Court of Protection (Amendment) Rules 2015, SI 2015/548. If a person lacking capacity to consent to their care and treatment arrangements (referred to as ‘P’) needs to be deprived of liberty in a community setting, this must be authorised by the Court of Protection (the court). The COPR 2007 provide for the appointment of a ‘Rule 3A representative’ in uncontroversial cases where the deprivation of liberty is not being contested. Their role includes providing the court with information about P’s best wishes, commenting on P’s care plan, and maintaining contact with P on an ongoing basis. A Rule 3A representative is normally a family member or friend. But in some

Please note that VAF9 Appendix 3, which was the self-assessment form used for Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) applications for entry clearance, has been withdrawn along with the VAF9. Those wishing to apply for entry clearance in the Tier 1 (Entrepreneur)

We have limited our research and comments to cover the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998). We have not commented on the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003, SI 2003/2426 (PECR 2003) or the forthcoming General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679. In its Guide to Privacy and electronic communications the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) explains how PECR fits in with the DPA 1998 as follows: ‘The Data Protection Act still applies if you are processing personal data. PECR just set out some extra rules for electronic communications. You must still comply with the Data Protection Act as well. In fact, regulation 4 explicitly says: ''Nothing in these Regulations shall relieve a person of his obligations under the Data Protection Act in relation to the processing of personal data.'' Naturally, there is some overlap, given that both aim to protect people’s privacy. Complying with PECR will help you comply with the Data Protection Act, and vice versa – but there

Please note that this Q&A covers a situation where there are no offshore income gains or available relevant income and the trust was established after 5 April 2009. Our Practice Note: Offshore trusts—matching capital payments—section 87 TCGA 1992 sets out that the first step of the matching process under TCGA 1992, s 87A is to determine the s 2(2) amount for the relevant year. Such computation takes trust losses into account. To the extent that a loss in one tax year is not fully set off against a gain in that tax year, the loss will be carried forward

Where a child is in care, the subject of an emergency protection order, or in police protection, section 50 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) provides that a recovery order may be applied for by an applicant who has parental responsibility for the child by virtue of a care order or emergency protection order or, where the child is in police protection, the designated officer (ChA 1989, s 50(4)). ChA 1989, s 50(1) provides that the court may make a recovery order where it appears to the court that there is reason to believe that such a child: • has been unlawfully taken away or is being kept unlawfully

It is not possible to combine employment income earned via Category A (salaried employment) with employment income earned via Category B (non-salaried employment): Immigration Rules, Appendix FM-SE, para 13(k). In all circumstances, in order for an applicant to rely on

In order to score points under the job creation requirement in a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) extension application, an applicant must show that the employee in question has settled status. This can include having the status of an EEA national (but does not mean they need to show they have permanent residence, or leave to remain under the new ‘settled status’ scheme, in the UK). The evidence of EEA citizenship which must be provided to demonstrate this is set out in the relevant Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) caseworker guidance: ‘Evidence of settled worker status It is the employer’s responsibility

When a lender (A) discharges the liability of a borrower to a secured lender (B), A may be entitled to revive and take the benefit of the security formerly held by B, along with any priority enjoyed by that security. This is referred to as being subrogated to that security interest. Subrogation is frequently sought in the mortgage lending context when there has been some defect in the security acquired by A, or where A failed to obtain any security at all (for example because of a fraud). It is, however, of potential application outside this context. The predominant modern analysis is that subrogation is available as a remedy for unjust enrichment. The lender must therefore fulfil the usual requirements of such a claim, establishing that: • the borrower has been enriched • the enrichment was unjust (in this context the most common grounds of restitution are failure of consideration or mistake) • the enrichment was at the expense of the lender This

For further guidance on a claim under Fraud Act 2006 (FrA 2006), see Practice Note: Fraud by false representation. Untrue warranty scenario This question considers the following scenario: • party X provides a warranty (not a representation) to party Y in a commercial agreement • party X knows that the warranty is untrue • in addition to the breach of warranty claim that Y will have against X, could the actions of X amount to fraud under the Fraud Act