date [date] Parties 1 [[name of Trustee in Bankruptcy] of [address] (the trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of the Debtor) (Trustee in Bankruptcy) OR [name of Debtor] (Debtor) [and [name of Debtor’s co-owner] both] of [address]] ([together] Seller) 2 [[name of Trustee in Bankruptcy] of [address] (Trustee in Bankruptcy)] 3 [name of (first) Buyer] [and [name of second Buyer] both] [of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [number]) whose registered office is at] [address] ([together] Buyer) 1 Definitions In this Agreement, the following definitions apply: Actual Completion Date • the date on the Transfer is actually completed; [Appointment • the appointment of the Trustee in Bankruptcy as trustee in bankruptcy of the Debtor’s estate by [the Secretary of State OR way of a creditors’ decision dated [date]];] Buyer’s Solicitors • [name] of [address] (reference [details]); [Charge[s] • the charge[s] appearing at entry [number] [and [number]] in the charges register of title number [number] at [date and time of official copy entries];] [Chattels • the items listed at the Schedule;] [Chattels Price • £[amount in figures] [([amount in words] pounds)];] Completion Date • [date]; [Debtor • [name] of [address];] Deposit • [number]% of the Price; Interest • interest at a rate of [4]% per annum over the base rate of [name

In a case such as this, where the claimant has sued the wrong defendant, should the defendant: • acknowledge service and then dispute the court’s jurisdiction? If so, on what grounds would the defendant dispute jurisdiction? • acknowledge service and file and serve a defence and then apply for strike out on the basis that the statement of claim is defective in that it names the wrong defendant? • acknowledge service and file and serve a defence and then apply for summary judgment? What would be the basis for summary judgment? In a scenario such as this, where a party has brought a claim against another party against whom they have no basis to claim, it is likely that the court will strike out

The Cabinet Office published guidance titled 'The Contract Management Playbook' on 25 March 2026. The document outlines established contract management principles and best practices designed to improve delivery outcomes for the public.

When a company owes money under a contract but the creditor goes into liquidation, the basic position is that the money is still owed and must be paid. If the contract sets out how payment should be made, then payment should be made in accordance with the method specified in the contract. Otherwise, it would be advisable to contact the liquidator to ask what method of payment would be acceptable. The reason the

‘Wrong contract’ challenges In several cases, the courts have considered whether an adjudicator’s decision is invalid if it is arguable that the adjudicator was appointed under, or applied the terms of, the ‘wrong’ construction contract. This issue generally arises where the responding party contends that: • there was no concluded contract between the parties, or • the terms of the contract under which the adjudicator was purportedly appointed and/or made its decision were in some way incorrect, or were not those applicable to the dispute Challenges raised on these bases are referred to in this answer as ‘wrong contract’ challenges. For guidance on raising jurisdictional challenges in adjudication, see Practice Note: Making a jurisdictional challenge in an adjudication. Background Before looking at the courts’ approach to different wrong contract challenges, it is helpful to

This Precedent green supplier contact—a standardised contractual pricing model clause aims to assist organisations in incentivising their supply chain to adopt environmental targets that reduce their Scope 3 emissions. It is a climate clause

Case study A contract incorporates the Standard Conditions of Sale (5th Edition). The parties had agreed in correspondence prior to exchange that the seller would pay the cost of an indemnity insurance policy but this is not reflected in the contract. The Standard Conditions of Sale are produced by the Law Society and are intended primarily for use in residential sales and sale of small business premises. Although not obliged to incorporate the standard conditions of sale, most solicitors make use of them. Usually the standard conditions would cover issues such as who is responsible for insurance. See: Contracts for the sale of land—overview. One option for the buyer in this scenario is to seek rectification of the contract. This is an equitable remedy which allows parties to correct a document so that it reflects the parties’ contractual intentions. The remedy is designed to correct mistakes that occur when recording

Employment analysis: In an unfair dismissal case brought by a migrant sponsored worker seeking interim relief, an employment tribunal may make a continuation of contract order even if the employer has lost its sponsorship licence because making such an order does not create an employment contract or relationship of employment, according to the London Central Employment Tribunal.

Commercial analysis: The case of Advanced Multi-Technology for Medical Industry v Uniserve Ltd was a dispute arising out of agreements relating to the procurement of Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) including medical masks during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. It raised a number of contractual issues, including misrepresentation and authority to act on behalf of another individual/entity and to bind them legally. Written by Iain Sharp, partner, and Reema Shour, professional support lawyer, both at Hill Dickinson LLP.

This Agreement is made on [date] Parties 1 [insert name of Customer] [of OR a company incorporated in [England and Wales] under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Customer); and 2 [insert name of Supplier] [of OR a company incorporated in [England and Wales] under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Supplier) (each of the Supplier and the Customer being a party and together the Supplier and the Customer are the parties). Background (A) The Customer conducts the business of [insert description]. (B) The Supplier conducts the business of supplying [insert description of services] to other businesses. (C) The parties have agreed that the Supplier shall supply services to the Customer on the terms set out in this Agreement. (D) The parties contemplate that the Supplier shall supply services to the Customer on a call-off basis. The parties agree: 1 Definitions and interpretation 1.1 In this Agreement: Affiliate • means any entity that directly or indirectly Controls, is Controlled by, or is under common Control with, another entity; Business Day • means a day other than a Saturday, Sunday or bank or public holiday in England; Change

It is best practice to keep information about share entitlement separate from any employment contract. This approach is designed to support the argument that the grantor or employee will not be liable for any loss caused to an option holder in consequence of an option lapsing (or becoming exercisable to a lesser extent) as a result of the termination or change of terms to their employment contract. As a result of the option details being contained in a totally separate agreement,

The Agency Workers Regulations 2010 (AWR 2010), SI 2010/93, reg 5 provides that, after 12 weeks in the same role with the same hirer, an agency worker becomes entitled to the same basic working and employment conditions as a direct hire. The right to equal treatment in relation to pay under AWR 2010, SI 2010/93, reg 5 is expressly excluded where an agency worker has a permanent contract of employment with an agency meeting certain conditions, and is paid during the weeks when the worker is not assigned to a hirer. For further information, see the sections: Rights after 12 weeks—same basic working and employment conditions and The right to pay between assignments (Swedish derogation)—position to 5 April 2020 of Practice Note: Rights under the Agency Workers