The simple answer to this question is yes, there is a right to lop or cut back hedges or trees that belong to a neighbour and overhang your land. The right to lop is an ancient right to abate a nuisance or a trespass. Most of the authorities go back to the 19th century for instance Earl of Lonsdale v Nelson (1823) 2 B&C 302 (not available on Lexis®Library) and Lemmon v Webb [1895] AC 1. In modern times the right was confirmed in Dayani v Bromley LBC [2001] BLR 503 (not available on Lexis®Library). However, as is always the case things are never that simple. There are a number of possible pitfalls. Care must be taken to ensure the right has arisen and is being properly exercised. See Practice Note: Neighbour disputes—noise and nuisance. The right depends on the lopping that is undertaken being necessary to abate a trespass or nuisance. The question that immediately arises is therefore whether there is in

Driving other than in accordance with a licence is an offence, contrary to section 87(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (RTA 1988) and Schedule 2 to the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. The definition of the offence is that the provisional driver must comply with conditions and if they drive a vehicle in contravention of the conditions they commit an offence. A provisional licence holder must: • not drive except under supervision of a qualified driver who is present with them in the motor vehicle (unless the motor vehicle is a motorcycle) • display leaner (L) plates to front and rear • not draw a trailer • not ride a motorcycle not having a sidecar and carrying another person • not drive on a motorway The sentencing

It is assumed for the purpose of this Q&A that the company is a private company limited by shares that the company is lawfully able to reduce its capital in accordance with Chapter 10 of Part 17 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006) (for further information, see Practice Notes: How to carry out a reduction of capital and Solvency statement—process and timetable). Upon a reduction of capital using the solvency statement procedure, which is only available to a private limited company, the resulting funds may be received by shareholders in one of two ways: • by payment of a dividend in respect of their shares, or • by a return of capital where the proposed reduction of capital is carried out in order to return

Whether agreements which are supplemental to a main agreement remain enforceable following the termination of the main agreement will depend on the construction of the relevant contracts. For information on the approach of the courts when considering the interpretation of contracts, see Practice Notes: • General rules of contract interpretation—summary • Contract interpretation—the guiding principles • Contract interpretation—rules of contract interpretation Generally, whether or not a contractual term operates after

It depends on the circumstances. The surrender must be accepted by the landlord. So, if the tenant has returned the keys to the landlord and the landlord refuses to accept the keys then

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

Subject to a number of exceptions, not on the face of it relevant here, any such disposal will require compliance with the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 (LTA 1987) which gives residential lessees certain rights to acquire that interest rather than the third party to which the landlord might prefer to transfer it. Subject to those exceptions, LTA 1987 applies where the premises contain two or more flats held by most types of leaseholders without statutory protection under the Rent Act or Housing Acts and those flats comprise more than 50% of the total number in the building (LTA 1987, ss 1,

Ireland—Dispute Resolution analysis: This article, was written by Cahal Carvill and Darren Fitzsimons of Arthur Cox LLP. A review of the High Court’s decision in Jaevee Homes Limited v Fincham.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has responsibility under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (HSCA 2008) for regulating bodies, including partnerships, which are engaged in regulated activities (eg the provision of health and social care in England). HSCA 2008, s 20 confers powers on the Secretary of State to make regulations governing the powers of the CQC to register providers of regulated activities. HSCA 2008, s 20(3)(a) provides that the regulations may impose requirements that persons engaged in regulated activities are 'fit to carry on or manage a regulated activity'. In 2014 the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated

By section 247 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) the Secretary of State outside of Greater London, or the council of a London Borough, may by order authorise the stopping up or diversion of any highway if satisfied that it is necessary to do so in order to enable development to be carried out in accordance with planning permission granted under TCPA 1990, Pt III or TCPA 1990, s 293A or by a government department. Such an order may make such provision as appears to be necessary or expedient for the provision or improvement of any other highway. See

Enduring powers of attorney (EPA) were replaced on 1 October 2007 by lasting powers of attorney (LPA). However where an EPA was made prior to that date it can still be validly used. In this scenario it appears likely that a property was held as joint tenants in law for two (or more) parties in equity as tenants in common. Upon the death of the first tenant in common (A), the survivor (B) became the sole legal owner, but held the equity on trust for himself and the estate of A in the same shares as previously.

Clause 2.29.2.1 of the JCT Design and Build Contract (DB) 2011/2016 provides that, where a Non-Completion Notice has been issued (due to the Contractor having failed to complete the Works (or a Section) by the Completion Date), and provided that an initial notice has been given under clause 2.29.1.2, the Employer may give a further notice that: ‘he requires the Contractor to pay liquidated damages at the rate stated in the Contract Particulars, or lesser rate stated in the notice, in which event the Employer may recover the same as a debt…’ Similar wording is found in clause 2.32.2.1 of the JCT Standard Building Contract (SBC) 2011/2016. Alternatively, the Employer may give notice that it will withhold or deduct liquidated damages from sums due to the Contractor (clause 2.29.2.2 of DB 2011/2016, clause