CPR Part 36 CPR 36.7(1) makes it plain that a Part 36 offer may be made at any time, including before the commencement of proceedings. The cost consequences of accepting an offer is set out in CPR 36.13. Where a Part 36 offer is accepted within the relevant 21-day period the claimant will be entitled to the costs of the proceedings up to the date on which notice of acceptance was served. CPR 36.13(1) clarifies that this includes the claimant’s recoverable pre-action costs. However, it will be noted that the rule refers to the ‘proceedings’. However, if an offer is made and accepted pre-issue, no proceedings will ever come into existence. As set out in Practice Note: Part 36 offers—pre-action costs recovery, a Part 36 offer made and accepted prior to proceedings being issued would not result in a deemed costs order under CPR 44.9(1)(b). Indeed, this is

Section 30 of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996) provides that where one spouse or civil partner is entitled to occupy a dwelling house by virtue of either a beneficial interest or a statutory enactment and the other spouse or civil partner is not so entitled, certain rights, known as ‘home rights’ will accrue to the latter. Those rights are the right, if in occupation, not to be evicted or excluded from the dwelling house in question by the spouse or civil partner, and the right, if not in occupation, with the permission

Pursuant to sections 3(3), 4(1)(c) and 27(2)(b)(i) of the Land Registration Act 2002 (LRA 2002), an annual periodic tenancy is not required to be registered, cannot be registered voluntarily and is not a

The court has a general power whether of its own motion or on the application of a party to strike out a claim for non-compliance with an order, rule or practice direction: CPR 3.3 and 3.4. In recent years and in particular since the Jackson reforms, implemented from 1 April 2013, there has been a greater emphasis in the civil courts on the need to comply with deadlines that are laid down. It is now far more likely that the court will exercise its powers to strike out a statement of case for non-compliance, and far harder to obtain relief from sanctions since the decision in Mitchell v New Group Newspapers Limited, as explained by Denton v TH White Ltd. The court when considering an application for relief from sanctions, and thus the reinstatement

A divorce petition may be served by way of personal service in accordance with Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 6.7, or by first-class post or other service which provides for delivery on the next business day in accordance with FPR 2010, PD 6A. Alternatively, where FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.11 applies (where the respondent has a solicitor acting for them and the applicant has been notified in writing that the solicitor is instructed by the respondent to accept service of the application), by way of document exchange. In the first instance, the petition will usually be served by first-class post along with an acknowledgment of service. If the respondent files a completed acknowledgment of service, the petition will be deemed served (FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.15). If no acknowledgment of service is received, in order to satisfy the court that decree nisi should be granted, service

Although private companies limited by shares are able to pass written resolutions, a general meeting must be convened where any resolution requiring special notice is being tabled. A resolution to remove a director requires special notice and therefore a general meeting must be convened. For further details on general meetings, see Convening a general meeting. A director may be removed from office by ordinary resolution of the members passed at a general meeting of a company before the expiration of his period of office and notwithstanding anything in any agreement between the director and the company, pursuant to section 168 of the Companies Act 2006 (CA 2006). Special notice of 28 clear days (ie excluding the day on which notice is given and the day of the general meeting) of the proposed ordinary resolution to remove a director is required to be given to the company (CA 2006, s 168(2))—28

It is in principle possible to remove an executor or executors, and for alternatives to be appointed, but this will depend upon the circumstances of the particular case. Given the broad ambit of this Q&A we have limited our response to setting out the relevant principles in brief in respect of a number of potential alternatives. See Practice Note: Removal, renunciation and retirement of personal representatives. It is possible for the court to ‘pass over’ an executor prior to a grant of probate. The court can exercise the powers contained in section 116 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981) where it is necessary or expedient to appoint in its discretion such other person than the person or persons

In answering this Q&A, research has been limited to cover the position under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998). It has been assumed that this Q&A refers to a request made under DPA 1998, s 35(1), that the relevant client is not the data subject and this request is not in any manner a subject access request. For information relating to a data subject access requests, see Practice Notes: Subject access requests under the DPA 1998 and Subject access exemptions under the DPA 1998. Non-disclosure provisions Unless an exemption applies, a data controller

Paragraph 15 of Schedule 3 to the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993 provides: • (1) The initial notice shall not be invalidated by any inaccuracy in any of the particulars required by [or by virtue of] section 13(3) or by any misdescription of any of the property to which the claim extends. • (2) Where the initial notice— (a) specifies any property or interest which was not liable to acquisition under or by virtue of section 1 or 2, or (b) fails to specify

A statutory demand is a formal demand for a debt served by a creditor on its debtor. Failure by the debtor to pay the debt, or satisfy or secure it to the creditor's satisfaction—or take the appropriate steps to challenge it—will create a presumption that the debtor is insolvent (on an inability to pay basis) and therefore exposes the debtor to the risk that insolvency proceedings will be commenced by the creditor. See: Statutory demands for restructuring and insolvency professionals—overview. A sum demanded

Judgment creditors can, if they wish (and can afford it), execute their judgment by using one or several enforcement methods at once (some methods are mutually exclusive). The available options are set out in CPR 70 and are summarised in Practice Note: Which enforcement of judgment method should I choose? We are not aware of any provision in insolvency legislation that states that you cannot present a winding-up petition where some other method of enforcement action is already underway. However winding

In conducting our research we have focussed on when the ‘relevant period’ commences for service of a Part 36 offer (CPR 36) and what happens if the offeree denies being served with the Part 36 offer. The relevant period CPR 36.3 states: ‘(g) “the relevant period” means— (i) in the case of an offer made not less than 21 days before a trial, the period specified under rule 36.5(1)(c) or such longer period as the parties agree; (ii) otherwise, the period up to the end of such trial.’ CPR 36.5(1) states: ‘(1) A Part 36 offer must—… …(c) specify a period of not less than 21 days within which the defendant will be liable for the claimant's costs in accordance with rule 36.13 or 36.20 if the