½Û×ÓÊÓƵ

View the related checklists about Estoppel

Negotiating and drafting a settlement agreement—checklist

Negotiating and drafting a settlement agreement—checklist This Checklist is designed to highlight issues arising during the negotiation and drafting of a settlement agreement. For guidance on how to negotiate and draft a settlement agreement, see Practice Notes: • How to agree and draft a settlement agreement (non-employment claims) • Settling disputes—how to document a settlement • Settling disputes—drafting the settlement agreement Issue Key consideration Content links When to seek settlement? Ensure that settlement is under consideration throughout all stages of a dispute, including pre-action. Ensure this includes consideration of the different options available for settlement, eg direct negotiation and agreement between the parties / their legal advisers (including consideration as to whether a Part 36 offer is appropriate) or some form of assisted alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedure, such as mediation. Since a rule change in October 2024, the court has the power to order the parties to engage in ADR (see CPR 3.1(2)(o)).Check whether there are any contractual obligations on the parties with regard to settlement, eg the...

View the related practice notes about Estoppel

US—patents fundamentals—the America Invents Act

US—patents fundamentals—the America Invents Act This Practice Note was originally written for Lexis Practice Advisor®, in the US. This Practice Note provides an introduction to the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), which is the first major overhaul of the US patent system since the Patent Act of 1952. It converts the US patent system from a first-to-invent to a first-to-file system for patents with an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013. A first-to-file system awards the patent to the inventor who first files the application, as opposed to the inventor who first reduces the invention to practice. This encourages prompt application filings and in most cases eliminates the need to resolve disputes as to who is the first inventor. Moving to a first-to-file system also harmonizes the US patent system with foreign patent systems, which are nearly all first-to-file. In addition to switching to the first-to-file system, the AIA also: • expanded the procedures available in the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for patent...

Jurisdiction agreements—exclusive jurisdiction agreements

Jurisdiction agreements—exclusive jurisdiction agreements This Practice Note considers exclusive jurisdiction agreements (also known as choice of court agreements). Specific considerations as to the construction, effect and enforcement of this type of jurisdiction agreements are discussed. For guidance on: • non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses, see Practice Note: Jurisdiction agreements—non-exclusive jurisdiction agreements • asymmetric jurisdiction clauses, see Practice Note: Jurisdiction agreements—asymmetric jurisdiction agreements What is an exclusive jurisdiction clause? An exclusive jurisdiction clause or agreement, provides for the courts in a specified jurisdiction to hear disputes between the parties; it creates a contractual right not to be sued elsewhere. A number of exclusive jurisdiction clauses also include forum non conveniens waivers, ie the parties irrevocably waiver any right to bringing proceedings in a jurisdiction other than that stipulated in the jurisdiction clause. Exclusive jurisdiction clauses differ from non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses in that they exclude the rights of the parties to commence proceedings in a different jurisdiction to that provided for in the jurisdiction clause. For example exclusive jurisdiction clauses, see Practice...

View the related precedents about Estoppel

Agreement to extend limitation—standstill agreement

Agreement to extend limitation—standstill agreement This Agreement is dated [insert day] of [insert month] 20[insert year] Parties 1 [Insert full name and address of individual or company name, number and address of registered office] (Party A) 2 [Insert full name and address of individual or company name, number and address of registered office] (Party B) each a ‘Party’ and together the ‘Parties’ The parties agree: 1 Definitions and interpretation Dispute • means any claim arising out of or connected with [Insert description of the dispute/circumstances giving rise to the dispute]. Proceedings • means court proceedings in England and Wales and any arbitration in relation to the Dispute. Period of Extension • means the period which begins on the date of this Agreement and continues until it is terminated in accordance with clause 3. Extension Date • means the date on which the Period of Extension ends, in accordance with clause 3. 1.1 Save where the context otherwise requires, in this Agreement: 1.1.1 words in the singular include the...

Cohabitant claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996—client guide

Cohabitant claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996—client guide This document provides general guidance regarding the property rights of cohabitants and claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996. Your family lawyer will be able to provide specific advice based on your circumstances. Who can apply? Cohabitants do not have the same rights to make property claims as married couples or civil partners. Instead, disputes between cohabitants regarding their interests in a property are determined in accordance with the law of trusts. The 'common law' wife or husband does not exist in law, and claims by cohabitants are very limited in comparison with spouses or civil partners. In some circumstances it may be possible to make a claim on behalf of a child (see: Financial arrangements for children—client guide). There are two main ways in which a cohabitant may have an interest in a property: • as a joint owner, or • where the property is in the...

View the related q&as about Estoppel

Where a document forms a schedule to an agreement, if the document in the schedule is signed rather than being printed as a separate agreement and then signed, is it a valid execution of that document?

Where a document forms a schedule to an agreement, if the document in the schedule is signed rather than being printed as a separate agreement and then signed, is it a valid execution of that document? This question envisages a written agreement, which contains, in a schedule, the form of a further agreement, which the parties may sign on some future occasion. When that occasion arises, the parties simply sign the schedule, rather than printing out a new document in the form of the schedule and then signing it. This question is whether that will constitute a binding contract when executed in such circumstances. The general principle at common law is that a contract can be made quite informally and no writing or other form is necessary. This basic rule is subject to statute, which may require a particular form of contract, eg in writing and/or other formalities. The most obvious examples are contracts for the sale of land (section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989) and guarantees...

Can a party to a general commercial contract accept a notice terminating for convenience which has not been served in accordance with the requirements of the contract and will such acceptance result in the contract terminating on the date set out in the notice?

Can a party to a general commercial contract accept a notice terminating for convenience which has not been served in accordance with the requirements of the contract and will such acceptance result in the contract terminating on the date set out in the notice? This Q&A assumes that the question relates to a business-to-business contract. A contract may be brought to an end in a number of different ways. For more information, see Practice Note: Termination and expiry of contracts. Where an agreement includes a right to terminate for convenience, to avoid arguments as to the effectiveness of the exercise of such right, close attention should be paid to the requirements of the agreement including any notices clause. The courts generally require strict compliance with the requirements of notice clauses. The effectiveness and consequences of a purported exercise of a right to terminate for convenience will depend on the construction of the agreement as a whole and the surrounding factual context. The courts have found a number of termination notices...

View the related News about Estoppel

Incorrect spouse’s pension statement did not constitute legally binding agreement and member did not reasonably rely on it (Mr W, CAS-111806-F8J2)

Pensions analysis: The Deputy Pensions Ombudsman has partially upheld a complaint about the reduction to a spouse’s pension. Martin Scott of gunnercooke LLP looks at the decision.

Res Judicata and the protection of registered designs in the EU and UK post-Brexit (Praesidiad v Zaun)

IP analysis: The Court of Appeal upheld a High Court decision striking out Zaun Ltd’s (Zaun) counterclaim challenging the validity of a registered EU Design (REUD) and its UK re-registered design (UKRRD) equivalent. Praesidiad Holding BVBA (Praesidiad), previously known as Betafence, the design rights holder, had already successfully defended the design’s validity through the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and EU courts. The Court of Appeal ruled that Zaun’s renewed UK challenge was barred by res judicata (the legal doctrine preventing re-litigation of claims or issues that have already been resolved by a competent court) and constituted an abuse of process, despite the UK’s departure from the EU. The decision reinforces that EUIPO judgments, particularly where upheld by the EU General Court, may remain binding in UK proceedings involving post-Brexit re-registered rights. For rights holders, this affirms the continued value and enforceability of EU-originated IP rights in the UK. For defendants, it highlights the importance of raising and resolving validity issues in the appropriate forum, as opportunities to re-litigate...