You have asked: Where the two registered proprietors (A and B) are co-owners holding the property for themselves as tenants in common and B is to purchase A's interest in the

The question suggests that the drainage easement is subject to an express provision to pay the maintenance costs. The issue is whether non-payment justifies the servient owner in cutting off the dominant owner’s use of the drainage easement. One can anticipate that the consequence of such action may amount to the creation of a nuisance or an interference with the use of the easement. As ever, the answer to the question may be determined within the terms of express grant. For example, a distinction may be drawn between the original covenantee and their successors in title: the latter may be under no obligation

Where does the value break? Early in the restructuring negotiations, the parties will obtain valuations of the company to determine where value breaks (see Practice Note: Types of valuation for R&I lawyers). The valuation determines: • which tranche(s) of debt is impaired • which creditors are clearly out of the money and so have no seat at the restructuring table • which creditors are near the value break who may dispute the valuation • the likely split of equity or debt instruments in the company post-restructuring • who will be asked to contribute more money in return for a stake in the company post-restructuring • which creditors might want to buy out the senior creditors to avoid an enforcement and resultant impairment of their debt Creditors in the tranche where value breaks will expect to receive a greater share of the equity in the restructured entity as recompense for their impairment and as an incentive for them to approve a restructuring agreement (see Precedent: Restructuring Agreement). The valuation will determine which

For the purposes of this Q&A, it is assumed that: • there are no details of the nature or urgency of remedial works • there are no details as to precise location of the wall • the answer may differ if the Party Wall etc Act 1996 (PWA 1996) was (a) applicable, and if so (b) complied with In the circumstances, the home owner could be held liable and proceedings could be issued against them. As the wall in this Q&A adjoins both properties, it may be a party wall and therefore PWA 1996 may be relevant. PWA 1996 sets out prescribed notice procedures which must be followed if PWA 1996 is engaged. The home owner ought to have served a notice on the adjoining owner, setting out details of the proposed works including the

‘Seisin’ is a medieval legal concept reflecting the idea of possession by a freeholder. Where two neighbouring plots of land were owned in fee simple by the same person, and the freeholder was in occupation of both plots, it would make sense to describe the situation as one where there was ‘unity of seisin’. Furthermore, this would remain the case where one, or even both, plots were encumbered by subsidiary interests (such as leaseholds); the concept of seisin disregarded the fact that possession of the land was vested in a tenant. Accordingly, where Plot A (being the whole of a dominant tenement) and Plot B (being part of a servient tenement)

Rule 2 of the introductory rules of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024 revokes the Insolvency Rules 1986 (IR1986), SI 1986/1925 and all other amendments thereto with effect from 6 April 2016 (IR 2016, SI 2016/1024, r 1). The effect of this is that IR 2016 in their entirety apply to all open insolvency appointments with effect from 6 April 2016, regardless of the date and type of appointment. It was recognised by those drafting IR 2016 that IR 1986 ceasing to be applicable

When an individual bankrupt is adjudged bankrupt, their estate (as defined in section 283 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986)) automatically vests in their trustee in bankruptcy (trustee) once appointed pursuant to IA 1986, s 306. Since 6 April 2017 (except in transitional cases), the official receiver is appointed as the first trustee upon the making of the bankruptcy order. A bankrupt’s estate comprises all property belonging to or vested in the bankrupt at the commencement of the bankrupt, but does not include any property held by the bankrupt

Section 163 of the Highways Act 1980 (HiA 1980) provides that a competent authority may, by notice to the occupier of premises adjoining a highway, require them within 28 days from the date of service of that notice to construct or erect and thereafter to maintain such channels, gutters or downpipes as may be necessary to prevent water from the roof or any other part of the premises falling upon persons using the highway, or so far as is reasonably practicable, surface water from the premises flowing onto, or over, the footway of the highway. A local authority can therefore require an occupier of such premises

Although referring to correspondence as opposed to court proceedings, the Resolution Good Practice Guidance to Correspondence states in relation to arrangements for children that: ‘Children arrangements should not be referred to in letters about the financial arrangements. The issues should be kept separate and there should be no suggestion that the children are being used as bargaining tools.’ While it may be envisaged in some cases that there may be a costs saving if directions are given on an application under Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) at the conclusion of a final hearing as to arrangements for the children, potentially emotions may be heightened and one or both parties may be unhappy

A freehold covenant is a contractual promise by the freeholder of land, which can either be a restrictive (or negative) covenant, being an agreement not to do something (for example not to erect a further building on the land), or positive, requiring the landowner to do something, such as maintain a boundary wall. Positive covenants do not generally run with the land, whereas restrictive covenants are often designed to do so, as the purpose of the covenant is to confer a benefit upon the dominant tenement, which is ordinarily land that has at some stage been retained by the transferor of the servient tenement. In respect

There is an underlying distinction between a non-molestation order and an occupation order which needs to be borne in mind. An occupation order cannot be made of the court’s own initiative and needs a formal application under the relevant section (presumably, in this instance, under section 33 of the Family

Legal ownership of a property in England and Wales where there is more than one proprietor will always be as joint tenants. This means that each owns the indivisible whole; and if one dies, the other seamlessly becomes the sole owner (or if there are more than two legal owners, each diminishing number of owners does, until there is only one left). This is known as the doctrine of survivorship. There is no transfer, and the interest of the co-owner does not fall into their estate; rather their interest is simply extinguished. Co-owning