Caveats Definition

GLOSSARY

Published by a ��˾��ҹ�� Restructuring & Insolvency expert

What does Caveats mean?

This is a process lodged at courts in Scotland which can provide a person with notice'>advance notice of applications for winding-up; bankruptcy petitions issued in Scotland or orders for interim interdict (injunction)

View the related checklists about Caveats

Appointing a distributor abroad—checklist

Appointing a distributor abroad—checklist This Checklist sets out the main issues for a manufacturer or wholesaler to consider when appointing a distributor overseas. This Checklist considers preliminary and legal issues to be considered before appointing a distributor outside of the UK and commercial terms that manufacturers or wholesalers may wish to address when drafting and negotiating a distribution agreement. Preliminary Issue Consideration Is distribution the right channel to market? Consider the options:• agent • direct sales • distributor Agency:• principal has contractual relationship, and closer business contact with customer • principal can take advantage of the agent’s expertise and contracts in the territory • may give rise to taxable presence for principal in overseas territory • local laws may be pro-agency, making termination of an agent difficult/expensive Direct sales:• same advantages as agency, plus the manufacturer has an employment relationship with locally employed sales force • same disadvantages as agency, and may be more expensive (costs of employment, particularly in countries where employers' contributions are high) •...

Procedural table—caveat

Procedural table—caveat Action Form No Non-Contentious Probate Rules 1987 (NCPR 1987), SI 1987/2024 (as amended) Caveat is entered Caveat application online or Form PA8A (available in the forms tab of the Probate actions subtopic) NCPR 1987, SI 1987/2024, r 44(2) Caveator enters caveat at Principal Registry of the Family Division or a district probate registry by post, electronic means or attending personally themselves or by instructing a solicitor. NCPR 1987, SI 1987/2024, r 44 Fee: £3 (if the caveat is entered electronically, this must be paid electronically). Name of deceased entered in index of caveats. NCPR 1987, SI 1987/2024, r 44(4) The caveat remains in force, except as otherwise provided, for six months from entry. NCPR 1987, SI 1987/2024, r 44(3)(a) The index of caveats is searched NCPR 1987, SI 1987/2024, r 44(4) On receipt of application for grant in the registry at which the application is made or of notice of application of grant made in any other...

Part 26A restructuring plan deal debrief—Chaptre Finance plc (second plan)

Part 26A restructuring plan deal debrief—Chaptre Finance plc (second plan) Chaptre Finance plc applied for a second Part 26A restructuring plan (RP) at a convening hearing in October 2024 and sanction hearing in November 2024. The key points appear below (capitalised terms not defined herein are as defined in the convening and sanction judgments). The Company launched and obtained a first RP in 2023 (see Practice Note: Part 26A restructuring plan deal debrief—Chaptre Finance plc (first plan)). This Deal Debrief forms part of our Restructuring plans toolkit. For a detailed analysis of key metrics from the RPs filed in 2023 and commentary from leading lights in the restructuring world, see Practice Note: Market Insights Trend Report—trends in Part 26A restructuring plans in 2023. Name of plan company Chaptre Finance plc (the Company) Industry sector Energy (the Company was incorporated for the purpose of financing the construction of a biomass power plant in Teesside which is designed to produce electricity by burning wood pellets and chips). Place of debtor’s incorporation...

Fast find key contentious trusts and estates precedents

Fast find key contentious trusts and estates precedents Probate actions Client guide This Precedent client guide provides an overview of probate disputes for a client or potential client. It sets out what contentious probate is and the types of claims that can be brought. It also provides practical points for the client to consider: Contentious probate—client guide Pre-action It is necessary to gather information during the pre-action stage. It is common to request information from relevant health authorities and to request a copy of the Will file. Form 124–letter to general practitioner or local health authority incorporating a request for a report Probate actions—Larke v Nugus letter A letter of claim provides early warning of the claim and sets out why it is being made. Letter of claim—probate action Letter of claim—proprietary estoppel claim Caveats and citations A caveat (also known as a stop) is a written notice that a person who wishes to prevent a grant being issued may enter in any registry or sub-registry. Warning to caveator Summons...

Discover our 122 Practice Notes on Caveats

Service Level Agreement (hardware/software fault resolution support services)

Service Level Agreement (hardware/software fault resolution support services) Service Level Agreement 1 Definitions 1.1 In this Schedule: 24x7x365 • means 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, 365 days per year (or 366 days if a leap year); Business Day • means any day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or a public or bank holiday in England; [Critical Service Level Failure • means a failure by the Supplier to achieve a P1 Resolution in accordance with the P1 Resolution Service Level (subject to paragraph 4) on [[three] occasions in any [three] Month period OR define as appropriate];] End of Support • means that: (a) the version of any software in the Supported System; or (b) any model of hardware in the Supported System, has reached its end of support date (as specified by the Supplier or the relevant third party manufacturer) applicable to all users in the market of that software version or hardware model and is therefore no longer supported by the Supplier (or the relevant...

Price and service notice—fixed price—general—law firms

Price and service notice—fixed price—general—law firms 1 Legal costs 1.1 There are [two OR three] main elements to the legal costs of [insert brief description of services, eg obtaining a grant of probate and distributing an estate]: 1.1.1 our charges; 1.1.2 expenses we must pay out of your behalf[; OR .] 1.1.3 [costs that you may have to pay another party.] 1.2 Our charges 1.2.1 We charge a fixed price [of £[insert price excluding VAT] OR ranging between £[insert price excluding VAT] and £[insert price excluding VAT] depending on [insert description of the factors that will dictate where in the fixed price range your fees will fall, eg the value and complexity of your matter]]. 1.2.2 [If a matter or transaction does not reach a conclusion, we reserve the right to charge for the work done, using our normal charging basis of £[insert rate] per hour. This applies even where a fixed rate has been agreed for the whole matter.] 1.2.3 Our charges do not...

Dive into our 3 Precedents related to Caveats

Can automatic number plate recognition be used for enforcement in a local authority owned car park?

Can automatic number plate recognition be used for enforcement in a local authority owned car park? In principle, Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) can be used for enforcement in a local authority car park but there are caveats as to use that may provide a basis for challenge. Accordingly, the answer is not straightforward and is dependent on various factors. On the assumption the question concerns regulated public on or off-street car parks, there are two distinct areas of legislation that apply: • the criminal law regime whereby enforcement is governed by the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (RTRA 1984), and • the civil law regime for a civil or special enforcement area (C/SEA) whereby enforcement is governed by the Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA 2004) and contravention is subject to the law of contract As a pre-requisite under either regime, the car park should be created under proper powers in accordance with RTRA 1984. Prior to deployment, the local authority must satisfy itself that the device is approved and...

What is the key difference between certificate of title (7th edition 2012) and the 2016 update?

What is the key difference between certificate of title (7th edition 2012) and the 2016 update? The main changes in the 2016 update are: • new clause 1.6 confirms that where the recipients of the certificate are more than one person, the certifier’s aggregate liability to all the addressees is no greater than the liability they would have if the addressees were a single person • clause 1.7 contains an acknowledgment that the addressees are entitled to rely on the certificate's statements even if any document or matter referred to in a statement is in the public domain or has been disclosed or made available in a number of specified ways such as via a data room • new clause provides an exclusion of personal liability for individual members, partners, shareholders, consultants, or employees of the certifying firm • the certificate can be disclosed to a third party but cannot be relied on (clause 1.3) • the statement that no matters are disclosed is also subject to...

See the 41 Q&As about Caveats

Autumn Budget 2024—What did we learn from the government’s UK Corporate Tax Roadmap?

Tax analysis: Naomi Lawton, Knowledge Counsel at A&O Shearman examines the government’s Corporate Tax Roadmap as announced at the Autumn Budget 2024 including its practical implications.

Claim for introducer fees to proceed to trial despite various challenges (Matrix Receivables Ltd v Musst Holdings Ltd)

Dispute Resolution analysis: The defendant’s application to strike out and/or for reverse summary judgment on the claimant financial services firm’s claims for breach of contract and/or unjust enrichment was refused. The judge held that there was a real prospect of success on each claim or some other compelling reason for the case to go to trial. There was also a real prospect of Matrix Receivables Ltd (MRL) overcoming the abuse of process arguments raised in terms of the alleged collateral attack on an earlier decision in which it was not a party. The fact that the trial bundle from a previous action had been wrongly reviewed by MRL’s solicitors in breach of CPR 31.22 was also not a reason to strike out the claim as that would be disproportionate where the breach was not deliberate and there had been no specific or tangible misuse of the documents. Practical steps could be taken to remedy such breach and MRL did not need retrospective permission to rely on those documents. Written by...

Read the latest 146 News articles on Caveats

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Case studies

"I'm able to do more in the day, which means I'm providing more value to my clients - and it's helped my margins in terms of how much I can bill. ��˾��ҹ�� is helping me make money."

ParrisWhittaker

Access all documents on Caveats

GET ACCESS NOW

Top

Trial

��˾��ҹ��

GLOSSARY