��˾����ҹ����

View the related checklists about Intention

UK Benchmarks Regulation—timeline

UK Benchmarks Regulation—timeline This timeline shows key developments relating to Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 (the UK Benchmarks Regulation) from January 2024 onwards. For earlier developments, see Benchmarks Regulation—timeline [Archived] 2024 Date Source Document Description 22 October 2024 UK Parliament SI 2024/1051: The Critical Benchmarks Regulations 2004 SI 2024/1051: These Regulations are made to specify the WMR Closing Spot Rates (also known as the WMR London 4pm Closing Spot Rate) and ICE Swap Rate® as critical benchmarks for the purposes of Article A20(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on indices used as benchmarks in financial instruments and financial contracts or to measure the performance of investment funds. They are made in exercise of legislative powers under Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 in connection with assimilated law. They are due to come into force on 13 November 2024.See: LNB News 22/10/2024 108 1 October 2024 FCA and BoE FCA press releaseThe end of LIBOR The BoE has issued a joint press release...

Procurement Act 2023—key changes

Procurement Act 2023—key changes STOP PRESS: As of 24 February 2025, the main provisions of the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023) are in force. Procurements begun on or after this date must be carried out under PA 2023, whereas those begun under the previous legislation (the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016, the Concession Regulations 2016, and the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011) must continue to be procured and managed under that legislation. See Practice Note: Introduction to the Procurement Act 2023—PA 2023. Introduction The Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023) is the new legislation that will govern public procurement. It will replace the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102, the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016 (UCR 2016), SI 2016/274, the Concession Contracts Regulations 2016 (CCR 2016), SI 2016/273 and the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011 (DSPCR 2011), SI 2011/1848. On 12 September 2024, the government announced that the go-live date for PA 2023 will be delayed until 24 February...

View the related flowcharts about Intention

Claims under the FIDIC Silver Book 2017 (clause 20.2)—flowchart

Claims under the FIDIC Silver Book 2017 (clause 20.2)—flowchart This flowchart sets out the process for claims by the Contractor or Employer under clause 20.2 of the FIDIC Silver Book 2017, which applies to: • claims by the Employer for: ◦ additional payment or a reduction in the Contract Price, and/or ◦ an extension of the Defects Notification Period • claims by the Contractor for: ◦ additional payment, and/or ◦ an extension to the Time for Completion The claiming party must also comply with any specific requirements stated in the clause in which the relevant entitlement is set out. For more information, see Practice Note: FIDIC contracts 2017—Contractor and Employer

View the related practice notes about Intention

Specific and basic intent

Intention refers to the outcome sought by the defendant. Offences may be described as either ones of ‘basic intent’ or of ‘specific intent’. The Court of Appeal has described this distinction as ‘elusive’. The Court nevertheless provided the following definition of specific intent:‘Crimes of specific intent are those where the offence requires proof of purpose or consequence, which are not confined to, but amongst which are included, those where the purpose goes beyond the actus reus (sometimes referred to as cases of “ulterior intent”).’The Court also approved the reasoning that:‘[A] distinction is to be made between (i) intention as applied to acts considered in relation to their purposes and (ii) intention as applied to acts apart from their purposes. A general intent attending the commission of an act is, in some cases, the only intent required to constitute the crime while, in others, there must be, in addition to that general intent, a specific intent attending the purpose for the commission of the act.’Put simply, offences of specific intent require...

Intoxication and mistake

IntoxicationGeneral defences are those which arise from specific characteristics of the defendant or the circumstances of the offence which mean that the prosecution cannot prove all the elements of the offence. The investigating officer is under a duty to investigate crime impartially and fairly and so evidence supporting a defence should be collected and retained in the same way as evidence of the offence. Some offences are subject to specific statutory defences but the general defences should be considered in every case.Strictly speaking, intoxication, whether voluntary or involuntary is not defence to a crime per se.Specific intentWhere an offence requires specific criminal intent, voluntary intoxication may be sufficient to show that the accused could not have formed the requisite intent to commit the offence. The specific criminal intent required is that of bringing about a particular consequence at the time of the criminal action. If the accused was so drunk that they could not form a specific intention to bring about a particular consequence, then they would have a defence...

View the related precedents about Intention

Distribution agreement—non-exclusive—short form

Distribution agreement—non-exclusive—short form This Agreement is made on [date] Parties 1 [insert name of party] [of OR a company incorporated in England and Wales under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Manufacturer); and 2 [insert name of party] [of OR a company incorporated in England and Wales under number [insert registered number] whose registered office is at] [insert address] (Distributor); each of the Manufacturer and the Distributor being a party and together they are the parties. Background (A) The Manufacturer manufactures [and supplies] the Products. (B) The Distributor has agreed to distribute the Products on a non-exclusive basis in the Territory in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. The parties agree: 1 Definitions 1.1 In this Agreement: Active Sales • has the meaning given in Article 8(7) of VABEO; Affiliate • means any entity that directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by, or is in under common control with, another entity where “control” means the beneficial ownership of...

Claim against a driver for a collision caused by misleading signals

Claim against a driver for a collision caused by misleading signals IN THE COUNTY COURT AT [insert] Claim No: Parties 1 A B Claimant and 2 X Y Defendant _____________________________________________________________________________ PARTICULARS OF CLAIM _____________________________________________________________________________ 1 At all material times, the Claimant was the owner and driver of a [insert make and model of vehicle] registration number [insert registration number]. The Defendant was the owner and driver of a [insert make and model of vehicle] registration number [insert registration number]. 2 On [insert date], the Claimant was lawfully waiting at the intersection of [insert street name] and [insert street name, town, county]. The Claimant was stationary and preparing to turn left. As she waited, the Defendant’s vehicle approached from the Claimant’s right. The Defendant’s vehicle slowed and signalled to turn left into the Claimant’s street. In reliance on the Defendant’s signal, the Claimant commenced her left turn. The Defendant failed to turn left and proceeded across the junction, colliding with the Claimant’s vehicle. 3 The accident was caused...

View the related q&as about Intention

Is a Part 20 defendant normally required to complete a directions questionnaire ‘DQ’ (Form N181), does this answer change if the claim would be fast track, but the Part 20 claim multi-track? If the notice of allocation sent to the claimant does not require budgets, disclosure discussion report etc, can you ignore and propose standard directions? Also, outside the disclosure pilot, can one use standard disclosure?

Is a Part 20 defendant normally required to complete a directions questionnaire ‘DQ’ (Form N181), does this answer change if the claim would be fast track, but the Part 20 claim multi-track? If the notice of allocation sent to the claimant does not require budgets, disclosure discussion report etc, can you ignore and propose standard directions? Also, outside the disclosure pilot, can one use standard disclosure? In this Q&A, the defendant’s Part 20 claim is a counterclaim that has been made against a person other than the claimant under CPR 20.5. Is a Part 20 defendant required to file a directions questionnaire? CPR 20 deals with counterclaims and other additional claims by the defendant. CPR 20.3(2) sets out which of the Civil Procedure Rules do not apply to additional claims (which, as defined in CPR 20.2(2) includes counterclaims). Included in the rules that do not apply to additional claims is CPR 26, which sets out the requirement for the parties to file a directions questionnaire (DQ)....

A child with a non-UK domicile of origin in Country A moves to the UK with their parents and acquires a UK domicile of dependency. If the child leaves the UK after the age of 16 to live in Country B, what domicile would they have? What is the position if they later return to the UK?

A child with a non-UK domicile of origin in Country A moves to the UK with their parents and acquires a UK domicile of dependency. If the child leaves the UK after the age of 16 to live in Country B, what domicile would they have? What is the position if they later return to the UK? Once an individual has reached the age of 16, they become capable of acquiring their own domicile of choice. At that point, the individual can: • retain their domicile of dependence as a domicile of choice • abandon their domicile of dependence and acquire a different domicile of choice, or • abandon their domicile of dependence, but not acquire a domicile of choice, so that their domicile of origin revives C’s residence in Country B C may have acquired a domicile of choice in Country B by virtue of their physical presence there. However, enquires should be made as to whether C intended to stay there permanently or indefinitely....

View the related News about Intention

Employment weekly highlights—1 May 2025

This edition of Employment weekly highlights includes: (1) a new Employment Rights Bill factsheet on changes to the statutory sick pay structure, (2) the EHRC interim update on the practical implications of For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers Supreme Court decision, and confirmation that an updated EHRC Code of Practice is expected in summer, (3) analysis by Annie Davis of Old Square Chambers of Court of Appeal guidance on Article 14 ECHR challenges to employment legislation, (4) examination by the EAT of the benchmark for costs orders in discrimination claims, (5) an EAT judgment addressing the question of relevance when determining applications for information and disclosure of documents, (6) an EAT decision that acquiescence over businesses getting struck-off can be unreasonable conduct for the purposes of a costs order, (7) our new Practice Note on employers’ obligations to manage workplace temperature, (8) dates for your diary, and (9) other news items of interest to employment practitioners.

Property Disputes weekly highlights—1 May 2025

This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: analysis of a Court of Appeal decision on the binding nature of boundary agreements, the progress of the Renters’ Rights Bill, analysis on the impact of the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025 on the property industry, and High Court decisions on enforcing a loan agreement via the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, the proportionality of seeking possession against a disabled tenant, and an application for a proprietary injunction. It also includes publication of the 11th Edition of the King’s Bench Guide.