"While we began looking at ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ products primarily for cost saving, it quickly became more about customer service, ease of onboarding, ongoing training and breadth of resources available."
Co-Op
Access all documents on London borough
A single-tier council responsible for the delivery of all services for a defined area within Greater London, established by the London Government Act 1963.
A London borough is both a principal area and a local government area for the purposes of the Local Government Act 1972 and the Local Government Act 1992. The 32 London boroughs with the City of London, the Inner Temple and the Middle Temple together constitute the Greater London administrative area.
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.
For our full legal glossary and more legal research sources, register for a free Lexis+ trial
Checklist for appeals and reviews in insolvency proceedings Reviews A review in insolvency proceedings is where the court revisits and reviews an order already made by it. The review process (in both corporate and personal insolvency) allows a decision to be reviewed either by the judge that made it (see Official Receiver v Bathurst) or by another judge (see Re W & A Glaser Limited). Both the personal and corporate insolvency courts have the power to review, rescind or vary their own orders (section 375 of the Insolvency Act 1986 (IA 1986) and Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024, r 12.59(1)). Reviews must not be seen as an alternative route to appeal a decision and the court will exercise its discretion to review an order carefully. For further information, see Practice Note: Reviews of insolvency orders. General The table below deals with reviews of any order, other than a winding-up or bankruptcy order, made by the insolvency court. Step/action Time Authority 1....
Discover our 1 Checklists on London borough
Council members for a principal area are elected by the local government electors for that area. Every non-metropolitan county is divided into electoral divisions, and every metropolitan and non-metropolitan district is divided into wards, each returning a specified number of councillors. The electoral arrangements for each principal council are reviewed from time to time or upon request.There must be a separate election for each electoral division or ward.Members serve a four-year term.Local authorities have three options for the frequency of elections:•whole council elections: members hold office for four years; the elections are held every fourth year; all the members are elected in each year in which the elections are held, and they all retire together•elections by halves: members hold office for four years; the elections are held every two years; one-half are elected in each year in which the elections are held, and one-half retire in each election year•elections by thirds: members hold office for four years; the elections are held in every three out of those four years; one-third...
Relief from sanctions—making or opposing an application This Practice Note gives practical guidance on how to make or oppose (or defend) an application for relief from sanctions (RFS) under CPR 3.9. In particular, it covers the evidence in support of an application for relief, the evidence in response to a relief from sanctions application, costs issues in relief applications and how to appeal a decision granting or refusing relief. Throughout it offers general practical tips on applying for relief from sanctions. This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: • How to make an application for a court order (CPR 23) • Relief from sanctions—when is an application for relief required? • Case management—compliance • Relief from sanctions—the courts’ approach • Relief from sanctions—illustrative decisions (from 1 January 2024); and • Interim applications—costs recovery See also Precedents: • Letter requesting consent to application for relief from sanctions • Letter responding to request for consent to relief from sanctions • Draft order for relief from sanctions...
Discover our 50 Practice Notes on London borough
TCPA 1990, s 252 order (London) TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 THE EXTINGUISHMENT OF VEHICULAR RIGHTS ON HIGHWAY [insert highway description and number] ORDER [insert number] The Council of the London Borough of [insert name of borough] (The Council) makes this Order in exercise of the powers under section 249 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (‘the Act’). 1 The Council hereby authorises the extinguishment of vehicular rights on the highway described in, and shown on the plan, in [Schedule 1] to this Order in accordance with a proposal by resolution under reference [insert reference number of resolution] adopted by [insert name of local planning authority] for improving the amenity of the area that includes the public ceasing to have a right of way with vehicles over the said highway. 2 [Notwithstanding the provision for extinguishment of vehicular rights contained in Clause 1 above, the following vehicles may have access to the pedestrian area, namely [insert (a) vehicles complying with a particular description,...
TCPA 1990, s 252 Notice pursuant to a draft order under TCPA 1990, s 249 London Borough of [insert name of Borough], Town and Country Planning Act 1990 The Council of the London Borough of [insert name of Council] gives notice of the proposal to make an Order under Town and Country Planning act 1990, s 249 (TCPA 1990) to authorise the extinguishment of vehicular rights on [insert description of highway where vehicular rights are to be extinguished], more particularly described in and shown on the plan in Schedule 1 below. The proposed order is made in accordance with a proposal by resolution under reference [insert reference number of resolution] adopted by [insert name of local planning authority] for improving the amenity of the area, which includes the public ceasing to have a right of way with vehicles over the said highway. [The order would also authorise the creation of a new highway described in and shown on the plan in Schedule 2. OR The order would also authorise...
Dive into our 2 Precedents related to London borough
Is there any guidance or case law on the duty of care owed by a school to children outside of the school gates, eg on a footpath near to the school? Assume that the child was injured by a vehicle. See the judgment of Mr. Justice Nicol in the High Court case of Webster v Ridgeway Foundation School. Paragraphs [111]–[121] of the judgment provide analysis of the relevant authorities on the duty of care owed by a school to pupils within the school. The basic starting point is the oft-cited ratio of Auld L.J. in the Court of Appeal case of Gower v London Borough of Bromley that: ‘A head teacher and teachers have a duty to take such care of pupils in their charge as careful parents would have in like circumstances, including a a duty to take positive steps to protect their well-being.’ The principle is, in effect, that the school is acting in loco parentis. The first issue relevant to this Q&A...
Where the parties have failed to agree a two-week extension of time for the exchange of witness statements (requested by the other party three hours before the deadline and by a party that has repeatedly failed to comply with deadlines), what considerations will the court likely to take into account when deciding whether to grant an application for an extension of time for the service of a witness statement? The other party has not made an application for relief from sanctions. In answering this Q&A, we have limited our research to cover a situation where the other party has failed to comply with time limits set by a rule or practice direction under the CPR, or court order. Witness evidence and extensions of time As you will be aware, if a party wishes to rely on witness evidence, it must be set out in a witness statement, which must be served within the time specified by the court. CPR 32.10 provides: ‘If a witness statement or a...
See the 8 Q&As about London borough
This week's edition of Property weekly highlights includes: cases on the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999, equitable accounting by a mortgagee, modification of restrictive covenants, tenants’ insurance payments and exemption from business rates, a consultation and a working paper on planning reforms to boost housing delivery, consultations on biodiversity and updated guidance on higher-risk buildings.
This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes: High Court decisions that a landlord is not entitled to recover insurance rent corresponding to commission rebates, mortgage rights in the context of the doctrine of marshalling in a sale of land dispute, granting an injunction renewal against unauthorised encampments, granting injunctive relief to restrain unlawful protests and guidance on third party rights in the context of section 1 of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999. It also includes a Court of Appeal judgment concerning the scope of an agricultural exemption from business rates for buildings used for packaging eggs, and an Upper Tribunal decision concerning modification of a restrictive covenant.
Read the latest 33 News articles on London borough
**Trials are provided to all ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these ½Û×ÓÊÓƵ 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.
0330 161 1234