New this month...


Contested probate – conditional orders

June 2024 | Wills, probate and administration

A recent case was, said the judge, a tragedy – ‘like a modern-day King Lear’ – a husband and daughter (the claimants) versus her mother and her father’s (T) estate. The tragedy was not just the family fall out, but also the financial implications: the costs budget of £772,000 was significant in comparison to the …

This article is only available to subscribers.

HMLR – PG76

June 2024 | Conveyancing

HMLR’s PG76 (charging orders) gives advice on the points to take into account when considering making an application for entry of an agreed or unilateral notice or a Form K restriction in respect of a charging order made under the Charging Orders Act 1979. It also covers how an application to the court (including an …

This article is only available to subscribers.

HMLR – PG52

June 2024 | Conveyancing

HMLT has updated PG52 (easements claimed by prescription). Section 4.2 has been amended to clarify that a statement of truth or statutory declaration in support of a prescriptive easement must show continuous use up until immediately prior to the application being made. This is an important point for practitioners, so section 4.2 bears repetition in …

This article is only available to subscribers.

EAT – extending time

June 2024 | Employment

The EAT has heard a case relating to its new powers to extend time. The case summary is as follows: ‘PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, JURISDICTIONAL/TIME POINTS The 2023 amendment of the EAT Rules introduced a new power for the EAT to extend time where a minor error to submit relevant documents with the Notice of Appeal …

This article is only available to subscribers.

EAT – territorial jurisdiction

June 2024 | Employment

The EAT has heard a case involving territorial jurisdiction in relation to the ERA 1996 and Equality Act 2010. While it is fair to say that most employees will not be working on super-yachts, the comments of the EAT in relation to territorial jurisdiction are interesting. The case summary is as follows: ‘JURISDICTION; territorial jurisdiction; …

This article is only available to subscribers.

TA6 – continued controversy

June 2024 | Conveyancing

We reported in our April 2024 edition (p7) on the Law Society’s update of the Property Information Form to take account of the ‘Material Information’ guidance that Trading Standards issued to estate agents in November 2023. The legal press and social media continues to be awash with comments on the updated form and the risks …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Private – costs; children cases

June 2024 | Family

M unsuccessfully applied for costs following a successful appeal against an order for the appointment of a psychologist to do a family assessment. She sought costs against F and against the children’s guardian. This ruling confirms the general principle that in private law children proceedings, costs orders generally are rare. However, the court has discretion …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Evidence – hair strand testing

June 2024 | Family

Practitioners should note the court’s current approach to evidence derived from hair strand testing in public law proceedings under Part IV CA 1989. In the CA, Cobb J said: ‘This appeal has brought into focus once again the science of hair strand drug testing – its evidential value in context, its inherent reliability, and its …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Proceeds of crime – crypto assets

June 2024 | Crime

Criminals are increasingly bold in their use of crypto assets for money laundering and related crime. New rules have been introduced, giving powers to the police and NCA to seize a suspect’s crypto assets without any arrest having been made. Related items, such as flash drives, memory sticks and written passwords, can also be seized. …

This article is only available to subscribers.

Parental leave – meaning

June 2024 | Employment

The EAT has heard a case regarding parental leave, which opens with the following interesting statement from the judge: ‘An employee is protected against being dismissed because s/he took parental leave. An employee is also protected if s/he “sought” to take parental leave. Well, at least, in broad terms. The provisions are something of a …

This article is only available to subscribers.