STOP PRESS: From 6 April 2017, the Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925 were revoked and replaced by the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024. The content in this Q&A may have been affected by this change. For the purposes of this Q&A we have limited our research to a situation where the liquidator was appointed in a prior creditors’ voluntary liquidation (CVL). Can a winding-up order be made once a company is in a CVL? A company may go into a voluntary liquidation if: • it has a fixed period which has expired, or an event has occurred which its articles say is an event leading to liquidation, and the company has passed an ordinary resolution to wind up, or • it passes a special resolution that

The order of priority (or waterfall of payments) in a liquidation are governed by the Insolvency Act 1986 and the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024. Realisations from property subject to a fixed charge as created (ie not

It is assumed that the claim falls with the requirements for a costs budget and that you are acting for the claimant. For guidance, see Practice Note: Costs management and costs budgeting—general principles. A litigant in person is exempt from costs budgeting and therefore there was no requirement to file a costs budget at the time of the case management conference. Where, as in the scenario set out in the question, a litigant in person subsequently instructs solicitors to act on their behalf, the issue is whether a costs budget should then be filed. There is no rule within the CPR that addresses this point and we have been unable to find any case law which would assist in understanding the approach to be taken. A starting point is to look at the purpose of costs budgeting which is set out in CPR 3.12(2). This states that: ‘...[t]he purpose of costs management is that the court

For the purposes of this response, it is assumed that no litigation friend has yet been appointed and that there is no person with authority to conduct the proceedings as a deputy on behalf of the protected party. See Practice Note: Appointing a litigation friend in family proceedings for guidance where a deputy has been appointed, in particular the section on ‘Who may be a litigation friend?’. The following Practice Note may also be of interest: Capacity to litigate—family proceedings. Where a deputy has not been appointed, Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 15.4(3) provides that a person may act as a litigation friend if that person: • can fairly and competently conduct proceedings on behalf of the protected party • has no interest adverse to that of the protected party, and • undertakes to pay any

CPR PD 55A sets out information relating to how possession claims must be brought and conducted. It includes specific information relating to possession claims involving a mortgage. CPR PD 55A, para 2.1(4) provides that the particulars of claim must ‘give full details about any mortgage or tenancy agreement’. CPR PD 55A, para 2.5 sets out in detail what information must be included in the particulars of claim in a possession claim brought by a mortgagee. By virtue of CPR PD 55A, para 2.5(2), this information includes: ‘the state of the mortgage account by including: (a) the amount of: (i) the advance (ii) any periodic repayment, and (iii) any payment of interest required to be made (b) the amount which would have to be paid (after taking into account any adjustment for early settlement) in order to redeem the mortgage at a stated

Whether a claim is to be pleaded as a breach of contract or a restitution claim will depend on the specific facts of the case. For information on situations in which a restitutionary claim can be made, see: Unjust enrichment and restitution—overview and Practice Note: Unjust enrichment—elements of the claim. For information on

Where a lender makes a secured loan, this will be governed by section 20 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980), in addition to LA 1980, ss 5 and 8 (a cause of action in contract must be brought within six years, and 12 by way of deed). LA 1980, s 20(1) and (5) provides as follows: ‘20 (1) No action shall be brought to recover— (a) any principal sum of money secured by a mortgage or other charge on property (whether real or personal); or (b) proceeds of the sale of land; after the expiration of twelve years from the date on which the right to receive the money accrued.’ If

The remedies available to a party to a section 106 agreement (section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990)) to enforce it against the authority would depend on the terms of the TCPA 1990, s 106 agreement (or any other covenant made by the authority to this effect). Usually, the purpose for which a financial contribution under a planning obligation is to be used will be specified in the TCPA

Planning agreements made under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) are agreements between developers/landowners and local planning authorities (LPAs) which secure mitigation to make proposed development acceptable to allow planning permission to be granted. Further information about section 106 agreements can be found in Practice Note: Planning obligations—key points. TCPA 1990, s 106(1), allows ‘any person interested in land’ to enter into a section 106 agreement. Parties can only bind their own interest in land, and any successors in title. Normally the starting point for LPAs is to require all persons with a proprietary interest in land within the

The Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018 (AW(LAIA)(E)R 2018), SI 2018/486 provides for the licensing of persons involved in England in selling animals as pets, providing or arranging for the provision of boarding for cats or dogs, hiring out horses, breeding dogs and keeping or training animals for exhibition. The AW(LAIA)(E)R 2018, SI 2018/486 is a modern piece of legislation that provides two statutory mechanisms for a local authority to vary a licence. AW(LAIA)(E)R 2018, SI 2018/486, r 9(b) permits a local authority on its own initiative to vary a licence at any time with the consent in writing of the licence holder. AW(LAIA)(E)R 2018, SI 2018/486, r 16 prescribes the procedure to be followed for varying a licence without the consent of the licence holder (or suspending a licence) on the grounds set out in AW(LAIA)(E)R 2018, SI 2018/486, r

The Court of Protection The Court of Protection is a superior court of record (section 45(1) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005)) having jurisdiction over those who lack capacity within the meaning of MCA 2005, s 2. As such, MCA 2005 confers various specific powers on the Court of Protection relating to P’s personal welfare and/or property and affairs. As stated in the question, MCA 2005, s 47(1) specifically provides that the Court of Protection ‘has in connection with its jurisdiction the same powers, rights, privileges and authority as the High Court’. See Practice Notes: • Mental Capacity Act 2005—the codes of practice • Making an application to the

This Q&A considers whether a valuer instructed by the local authority to assess the undervalue of an interest disposed pursuant to the General Disposal Consent (England) 2003 (set out in Circular 06/03), must be independent and must not be employed in-house. Generally, there appears to be nothing preventing the authority from using an in-house valuer as long as they are appropriately qualified, although the authority should take care to safeguard itself from any claims of conflict of interest. This Q&A considers a scenario where the disposal properly falls within the terms of the General Disposal Consent 2003 and that the disposal of the interest at an undervalue is properly authorised and reasoned by the authority. The General Disposal Consent 2003 relates to the power under section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972 (LGA 1972) for local