As part of the government's plans to bring all government services and information into one place, the UKBA website was decommissioned on 26 February 2014. The main information page for UK Visas and Immigration is now on the GOV.UK website at UK Visas and Immigration (GOV.UK). For the time being, the UKBA website can still be accessed here: https://contact-ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/. However, this website is not being maintained for developments in immigration law and policy after 26 February 2014. To help you with your search for information that used to be located on the UKBA website,

The order of distribution in liquidation, following the realisation of security by secured creditors (other than those with floating charges) for their benefit, is provided for both in the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) and, from 6 April 2017, the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024. The general rule is that secured

This Q&A neatly raises two scenarios that frequently arise in personal injury cases. First, cases in which, despite the three-year limitation period, the client leaves it until the eleventh hour before instructing solicitors, leaving insufficient time to obtain supporting medical evidence and to fully particularise the special damages claim. Second, cases involving serious injury in which the final medical prognosis is not reached during the three-year limitation period, such that further medical evidence will inevitably be required after the proceedings have been instituted. The most important advice in both of these instances is to ensure that the claim form is lodged with the court within the three-year limitation period. It is simply not advisable to place reliance on the lottery of an application, pursuant to section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980, for a discretionary extension (albeit that the prospects of obtaining the same in historic sexual abuse cases has been increased by the decision of

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 (FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.40–6.48). This is supplemented by FPR 2010, PD 6B. When service is to be effected in another Member State of the EU, Regulation (EC) 1393/2007, the Service Regulation applies. Alternative methods of service outside the UK are service through foreign government, judicial authorities and British Consular authorities (covered by FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.45) or by a method permitted by the law of the country in which the respondent is to be served. For the purposes of this Q&A, however, the focus will be on service under

Where the bankrupt is the sole legal owner of a property, the legal title will vest in the bankrupt’s trustee in bankruptcy pursuant to section 306 of the Insolvency Act 1986. The bankrupt’s estate vests in the trustee in the same way as it was in the bankrupt’s possession. This includes potentially being subject to any rights which have been validly acquired by third persons at the commencement of bankruptcy, ie any beneficial interest(s). The following Practice

Where liability falls Currently, the available auto-parking assist function requires a driver to operate the gears and the accelerator to move the car backwards and forwards but the steering is automatic. There is very little autonomy in this scenario as the driver is required to remain in control for the functionality to work correctly. As such, unless there is a product defect (triggering product liability and imposing strict liability on the manufacturer if the product was not as safe as people are generally entitled to expect), the liability would fall on the driver of the car (or a third party driver if found to be at fault) in the usual way. However, advances in technology are increasing the level of automation and, under new technology, car manufacturers hope to introduce systems whereby the driver can leave the car completely and use a mobile phone app to perform the parking remotely. The Department for Transport (DfT) believes

Unfair terms Any term in a consumer contract or notice, including terms that deal with the retention of payments on cancellation, will be subject to the unfair terms provisions set out in Part 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA 2015). This requires that all terms in a consumer contract (or notice) must be: • fair—a term or notice is unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer, and • transparent—the term or notice must be expressed in plain and intelligible language and be legible Certain terms are also blacklisted, meaning they are automatically unfair and unenforceable (eg terms that exclude or limit the trader's liability in respect of the consumer's statutory rights). In addition, CRA 2015 provides a 'grey list' of terms that may be regarded as unfair in CRA 2015, Sch

For the purposes of this Q&A, it has been assumed that reference is to build over agreements, which are agreements entered into between developers and the relevant sewerage undertaker to regulate works which could impact a public sewer. Unlike other statutory provisions such as section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, we have been unable to find a particular statutory provision pursuant to which build over agreements are entered into. However, build over agreements are routinely required by sewerage undertakers as a way of ensuring that the following statutory requirements are met: • Requirement H4 of the Building Regulations 2010 (the Building Regulations), SI 2010/2214, Sch 1: ◦ requirement H4 requires that certain building works carried out

The question concerns English principles of conflict of laws (or private international law (PIL)) in matters of succession. The historical development of the rules of PIL is outside the scope of Lexis®PSL Private Client. However, we understand that the applicable law for determining questions relating to immovables, known as lex situs in common law systems, originated in the Middle Ages and that it draws upon

In a case of an express grant of right of way, irrespective of whether the dominant owner, ie the owner of the land benefitting from the right of way, is given an express right to enter onto the servient land to carry out repairs to the right of way, the dominant owner will have a common law right to do so, but only to do necessary work in a reasonable manner. See Carter v Cole. Repair for this purpose can include making alterations and improvements to the way to meet altered conditions. A person can alter the surface of the servient land to accommodate the right granted, for example by creating a made road or

Title burdened by easement Where an easement is claimed by prescription, it must be claimed in favour of the fee simple of the dominant tenement as against the fee simple of the servient tenement. The onus will be on the claimant to show that when the user began, the servient land was in possession of the freeholder, or that he was fully aware of it. Where a long leasehold interest has been granted, it is questionable whether a claimant would be able to demonstrate that the freeholder had the necessary knowledge of the use. In the case of Davis, the court quoted a passage from Megarry and Wade, The Law of Real Property, third edition as follows: 'A claim by prescription must therefore fail if user can be proved only during a time when the servient land was occupied

Both the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA 1996) and section 17 of the Married Women's Property Act 1882 (MWPA 1882), contain parallel jurisdictions to make declaratory orders as to established property rights and to enforce such rights. Unlike the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973), there is no power under either statute to redistribute property interests. Claims under TOLATA 1996 will commence in the county court and be subject to the CPR 1998, whereas claims under MWPA 1882 will commence in the Family Court and be subject to the Family Procedure Rules 2010, SI 2010/2955,