More sections of this document available when you sign-in to Lexis+ or register for a free trial.
This week's edition of Property weekly highlights includes: a Court of Appeal case on boundary disputes, analysis of the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025 and an Upper Tribunal case concerning the renewal of an Electronic Communications Code agreement.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû or register for a free trial
EXISTING USER? SIGN IN CONTINUE READING GET A QUOTE
To read the full news article, register for a free Lexis+ trial
**Trials are provided to all ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
* denotes a required field
If planning permission imposes restrictions on a licensed premises opening hours, once operational can the personal licence holder apply for a Temporary Events Notice (TEN) to open for longer hours than those permitted in the planning permission?To use any property for a licensable activity both
Micklefield clausesWhat is a Micklefield clause?It is common for employee share plans to provide that, on termination of employment (or when an employee is given or receives notice of termination of employment), subsisting share awards will be forfeited and subsisting share options will lapse.It is
What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a
Brussels I (recast)—domicile (Arts 4 and 63) [Archived]ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained.This Practice Note considers the general rule set out in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) when determining the relevance of a defendant’s domicile to
0330 161 1234