In answering this Q&A, we assume you are referring to a claim that has not yet been issued at court. The presentation of a bankruptcy petition, by a creditor or the making of a bankruptcy application by the debtor themselves has no legal effect on ongoing proceedings in which the debtor is the claimant. However, once a debtor has been declared bankrupt, most causes of action the bankrupt had an interest in will form part of the bankruptcy estate and will vest in the trustee pursuant to section 306 of the Insolvency Act 1986 immediately

For guidance on the definition of an administrator and executor, see Practice Note: Definition of a personal representative. We refer you to Commentary: Capacity to act: Tolley's Administration of Estates [A1.4], which sets out: ‘A person who is bankrupt at the date of death or who has been bankrupt in the past can be appointed an executor. Similarly, subsequent bankruptcy does not prevent a duly appointed executor from continuing to act. In practice there are, of course, good reasons why a bankrupt should not act as executor since his disability may create difficulties for the estate. For instance, if land is involved and a third party institutes a bankruptcy search against the executors, the bankruptcy will inevitably come to light.’ Commentary:

The main potential problem here is whether work in the UK after 1 July 2021, after which a frontier worker permit (FWP) has been required to enter the UK to work on that basis, where entry after that date had been without such a permit (eg via an eGate), constituted a breach of immigration law. And if so, whether that breach would lead to the application for an FWP being refused. In relation to the second question, even this constituted a breach of immigration law (for which see below), this would be unlikely to lead to refusal of the application. The suitability requirements for these applications are based on EU law refusal grounds, which have a much higher threshold than UK immigration applications under the Immigration Rules, Part 9. As explained in the Practice Note: Applying for a frontier worker permit, the

A highway is a way which any member of the public has the right to use at all seasons of the year. The definitive map is a legal record of the public’s right of way. If a way is shown on the map, then that is legal or conclusive evidence that the public had those rights along the way at the relevant date of the map (although this does not apply to the contrary, so that if a way does not appear on the map, this does not mean that there is no public right of way). The public will continue to have those rights unless there has been a legally authorised change. For further guidance on the definitive map, see Practice Notes: Public rights of way and Definitive map and modification orders. The question

This Q&A looks at whether a person whose application to the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) as a late applicant to the main scheme, or as a joining family member, has been refused, can apply to switch in-country to a work route, such as Skilled Worker. The Q&A does not cover the position as regards late applicants to the EUSS who were in the UK prior to the specified date (11pm on 31 December 2020), and did not leave the UK prior to making their late application. It would be anticipated that the vast majority of these EUSS applications should succeed, and different factors apply to those discussed below. For details of the EUSS and what constitutes late applicants and joining family members, see Practice Note: The EU Settlement Scheme—the eligibility requirements under Appendix EU and News Analysis What are the implications of the end of the ‘grace period’?

As confirmed in the Practice Note: Student: period and conditions of permission/Conditions, the Immigration Rules, Appendix Student, para ST 26.5 provides that: ‘A Student is not allowed to do any of the following: be self-employed or engage in business activity unless ST 26.8 applies’ Immigration Rules, Appendix Student, para ST 26.8 would apply where the student had made an in-time application as a Start-up migrant, following successful completion of a full-time course at degree level or above and the application is endorsed by a qualifying higher education provider with a track record of compliance and the application or any related administrative review is outstanding. However, as the Practice Note states, it is no longer

We do not have a specific article on this Q&A. However, we direct you to: About this title—authors, overview: Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents, which gives a useful and general introduction to guarantees and indemnities as well as a comprehensive collection of forms and precedents both of a commercial and personal nature. With particular reference to this Q&A, there may be different considerations whether you are dealing with the giver or taker of the guarantee. Patently in the case of the taker the capacity of the giver will be of prime importance. In respect of capacity, the commentaries: Capacity to contract: Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents [32] and Liability of person suffering from a mental disorder under a guarantee: Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents [34] from the Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents may be of assistance. We assume for the purposes of answering this Q&A that the donor has

To qualify as a personal injury trust, a trust may be in one of the following forms: • bare trust • discretionary trust, and • life interest trust For more on the different types of trust one may use to establish a personal injury trust, see Practice Note: Personal injury trusts. The two essential components for a valid personal injury trust are that: • a trust must be in existence, and • it must contain money which is paid as a result of a personal injury to the person claiming benefits or funding for care It should be noted however, that the

Pre-action, an application may be made under 'any Act' for disclosure of documents before proceedings have started. Section 33(2) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981) and section 52(2) of the County Courts Act 1984 (CCA 1984) are the primary bases for the court to order pre-action disclosure. However, the court may only make an order for pre-action disclosure under CPR 31.16 when all of the following criteria are satisfied (see Black v Sumitomo): • the applicant and the respondent are likely to be parties to subsequent proceedings • if proceedings had started, the respondent's duty by way of standard disclosure would extend to the documents sought • pre-action disclosure

Section 1029 of the Companies Act 2006 sets out who may make an application to court to restore a company to the register. It states that the court will allow anyone appearing to have an interest in the restoration of a company to bring an application to restore a

Case study X is a tenant under a lease (with security of tenure and named on the registered leasehold title) which is soon to expire. X died many years ago (intestate) and Y has been occupying the premises for business purposes subject to the lease. Y is the husband of X’s daughter (Z) and Z is the personal representative and will inherit X’s estate. Death of a lessee intestate On the death of a lessee, his interest in the demised premises, whether for a term of years or periodic, vests in his personal representative. The personal representative takes the demised premises as an assignee, but as the

On the death of a property owner, their interest in the premises vests in their personal representative under the Administration of Estates Act 1925 (AEA 1925). This is so notwithstanding that the owner has bequeathed the interest in their Will, as a legatee will not obtain the legal estate until the representative has, by an assent in writing, so vested it in them. For further reading, see Commentary: Vesting of lessee's interest in personal representatives: Hill and Redman's Law of Landlord and Tenant [1]. Depending on if the owner dies without