[100A Calculation of “discounted aggregate deficit” for the purposes of section 99]
Water Industry Act 1991 (1991 c 56) | Legislation

[100A  Calculation of “discounted aggregate deficit” for the purposes of section 99]

[(1) For the purposes of section 99 above the discounted aggregate deficit on a public sewer is the amount equal to the sum of the estimated relevant deficits for each of the twelve years following the provision of the sewer, in each case discounted in accordance with subsection (6) below.

(2) The estimated relevant deficit for any year is the amount (if any) by which the estimated drainage charges payable for the use during that year of that sewer would be exceeded by the

Powered by Lexis+®
 

Popular documents

LEXISNEXIS

Serving outside the jurisdiction with court permission—application and order

This Practice Note addresses issues when serving out of the jurisdiction and the permission of the court is required. It explains how to make an application and the form of order required. An application to serve out of the jurisdiction is generally made without notice and on the papers. Key

LEXISNEXIS

Mistake in contract law

Mistake in contract lawThis Practice Note considers the legal concept of mistake in contract law. It examines common mistake, mutual mistake, unilateral mistake, mistake as to identity and mistake as to the document signed (non est factum). It also considers the impact of each of these types of

LEXISNEXIS

Sentencing fraud offences committed by individuals

Sentencing fraud offences committed by individualsThe Sentencing Council (SC) has produced sentencing guidelines for fraud offences under the Fraud Act 2006 (fraud by false representation, fraud by failing to disclose information and fraud by abuse of position), false accounting under section 17 of

LEXISNEXIS

Standard of care in professional negligence claims

Standard of care in professional negligence claimsThis Practice Note considers the standard of care in professional negligence claims, originally formulated in Bolam v Friern Hospital as being that of reasonable skill and care but now reconsidered following Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health. It