Nuisance claims can be broadly categorised into private nuisance (interference with the use/enjoyment of land causing injury), public nuisance (an unlawful act/omission causing widespread harm) and the rule in Rylands v Fletcher (‘non-natural’ activity on the defendant’s land escaping and causing harm). Private nuisance In relation to a private nuisance claim, an individual’s conduct only becomes a nuisance when their acts are not confined to their own land and extend to their neighbour’s land. Examples of private nuisance include encroachment upon a neighbour’s land by a tangible thing, such as tree roots or causing physical damage to a neighbour’s land or building. Flooding is a further example of a private nuisance. When

Powers of an attorney The question relates to a property and affairs lasting power of attorney (LPA)—section 9(1)(b) of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005). Under such LPA, the attorney can make any decisions or take any action which the donor could have taken regarding their property and affairs. MCA 2005, s 9(4) provides that the authority conferred by an LPA is subject to (a) the provisions of the MCA 2005 and in particular MCA 2005, s 1 (the principles) and MCA 2005, s 4 (the duty to act in the best interests of the donor) and (b) any conditions or restrictions specified in the instrument. The donor can expressly restrict or enlarge the powers of the attorney. See Overview: Lasting powers of attorney—overview and Practice Note: LPA precedent instructions and preferences—property and financial

We are not aware of any specific prohibition on law firms accepting equity in a client company in lieu of legal fees for non-contentious legal work. We also note this practice was specifically referred to in guidance to rule 3 (Conflict of interests) of the 2007 Solicitors' Code of Conduct (no longer in force): ‘You are free to negotiate

This Q&A answers the following questions: • can a firm be liable to its client in a transaction where a loss is sustained through currency fluctuation arising from the firm’s delay? • what is the firm’s potential liability in: ◦ negligence, or ◦ breach of contract (under any relevant implied terms) • what if the loss arises out of a delay for which the firm is not responsible, eg delay on the part of the client or other party? • what if there is no delay to the transaction, but there is a currency fluctuation causing loss during the expected/normal transaction duration period? • can a firm limit its liability for claims arising out of the above scenarios eg through a clause in its Terms of Business? Practitioners encounter this kind of uncertainty and risk on a fairly regular basis, eg the Greek government debt crisis in 2015 and Brexit. It has been

The SRA Authorisation of Firms Rules require a law firm which is an authorised body to, at all times, have an individual who is designated as its COLP, and whose designation the SRA has approved. There are qualifying requirements as to who can be designated as COLP. The individual designated

The UK GDPR storage limitation principle requires that personal data is kept for no longer than is necessary. The ICO comments that there are close links between the storage limitation principle and the data minimisation and accuracy principles It may be difficult

For the purposes of this Q&A, we refer to the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA 1996); similar provisions can be found in other relevant legislation. For further information, see: • Practice Note: Settlement agreements in employment—legal requirements—Effect of contracting-out provisions • Statutory claims that may be validly settled by a settlement agreement—checklist It is one of the conditions regulating settlement agreements that the employee must have received advice from a relevant independent adviser as to the terms and effect of the proposed agreement and, in particular, its effect on their ability to pursue their rights before an employment tribunal. Under the ERA 1996, a person is a 'relevant independent adviser' for these purposes if they are: • not employed by or acting in the matter for the employer or an associated employer, and • a

A personal representative is a fiduciary. The general rule is that a fiduciary cannot benefit from their position and therefore cannot be paid for carrying out their duties (Robinson v Pett). Professional executors would, of course, not take on the role if they did not receive payment for their time. Therefore, most Wills include a charging clause which authorises a professional executor to charge for their services (see section 28 of the Trustee Act 2000 (TrA 2000)). In addition, TrA 2000, s 29 authorises a trust corporation

A lease is a contract made between landlord and tenant, supplemented by various statutory provisions which imply terms or prevent the parties from entering into certain terms. In the circumstances, unless prohibited by law, the landlord and the tenant are free to enter into whatever terms and conditions as part of the lease as they wish. Where a landlord wishes to demise premises to a tenant, the lease regulates their respective rights and obligations. The demise of premises gives to the tenant exclusive possession of them for the term of the lease (or any further

A lease must demise a specific piece of property. Where a lease is granted after 19 June 2006 for a term of more than seven years (meaning that it is a prescribed clauses lease), it must contain a full description

It has been held by the Privy Council that lease clauses stating that the right to forfeit cannot be waived, other than in writing, are ineffective: R v Paulson. Although there is a more recent first-instance decision to the contrary (State Securities plc v Initial Industry

The hallmark of a lease is that it grants exclusive possession. As Millet J put it in London Borough of Camden v Shortlife Community Housing (see case overview): 'A tenancy cannot be granted to an unincorporated association, as such a body has no legal status. Nor can it be granted to the members of the association from time to time, since a tenancy is a legal estate in land and such an estate cannot be vested in a fluctuating body of persons.' In any event, as no more than four people can hold a legal interest (see section 34(2) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (LPA 1925)), the impossibility of creating such a right to each of the members if they exceed that number is readily apparent. As the question suggests, the usual way of circumventing