|
|
Please click on the title
links below to view briefing note
|
Boundary Disputes - Hints & Tips
Boundary disputes most commonly occur between owners of adjoining
residential properties. This is because homeowners commonly
tackle issues affecting their homes emotionally rather than pragmatically;
they view the issue as a personal attack rather that standing
back and evaluating what is really the problem.
Historically, the drafting of Conveyances and Deeds of Easements
hasn't assisted us in determining boundaries or boundary agreements.
In the 1800's, solicitors would be paid per word when drafting
legal documents. As such they would pad out conveyances in order
to increase their income. In turn, this meant that the true meaning
or intention of the document would get lost in lengthy and unnecessary
text. Historical Conveyances and Deeds are therefore often unhelpful
when trying to see what was originally agreed between land owners.
However, solicitors nowadays should not be put off considering
them when they are trying to determine the boundary history,
and should certainly not ignore them as we have often been pleasantly
surprised to find key clues as to the true meaning and intention
of that document hidden within the text.
Another issue is a lack of knowledge
and understanding about boundaries. Most people assume that the
Land Registry red edging on Title plans signifies the line that
precisely defines their boundary. However, Lawyers, Chartered
Surveyors and other boundary experts are aware that this is a
misjudgement and that the red edging should only be treated as
a guide. Therefore, measurements scaled from this plan may not
match measurements between the same points on the ground; the
Land Registry itself advises that boundaries shown on its plans
are 'general boundaries'.
The Land Registry and Ordnance
Survey issued a joint statement, which can be found at http://www1.landregistry.gov.uk/about_us/ordsurvey/,
which defines general boundaries as follows:
- "General Boundaries
England and Wales operates a 'general boundaries' system of land
registration. A title plan with 'general boundaries' shows the
boundary of a property in relation to a given physical feature
on the ground such as a wall or hedge as identified on the Ordnance
Survey map.
- The red edging on a Land Registry title plan is therefore
not definitive as to the precise position of the boundaries.
For this reason official copies of title plans carry the following:-
- This title plan shows the general positions of the
boundaries: it does not show the exact line of the boundaries.
Measurements scaled from this plan may not match measurements
between the same points on the ground."
As such, if the location of fences,
walls and other boundary features change, and the Land Registry
is not specifically notified, or has not carried out an up to
date survey of the area and re-drafted its plans, the plans will
not show any changes.
In Alan Wibberley Building Limited
v Insley [1998] 1 WLR 893, Lord Hoffman referred to Land Registry
maps based on the Ordnance Survey and added that "the precise
boundary must, if the question arises, be established by topographical
and other evidence".
A further factor is the lack of any English Law against theft
of someone else's land. Plants, paving stones, dustbins and even
gnomes may be regarded as having been stolen from your land,
but the land itself cannot be stolen. Someone can seek to possess
your land, or even trespass upon it, but they'll never be regarded
as having stolen it. The lack of sanction means there is no deterrent.
Options
What should you do if you think your neighbour has stolen your
land or you simply are unsure of the boundary position?
The answer depends on your personal
circumstances and will often rest upon your relationship with
your neighbours and how open minded and pragmatic you are both
willing to be.
- You can consider the Title Plan
to you property and check whether there are any obvious discrepancies
with what is on the ground against what is registered. If you
have a straight line boundary fence on the ground but the plan
shows a clear kink, you know there is a discrepancy. NB// Don't
forget the Land Registry's general boundaries rule.
We can help you to consider the Title Deeds to your property
(unregistered land) or the Land Registry title documents (registered
land). If these documents do not prove helpful, we will be able
to obtain and consider the Land Registry title documents registered
against neighbouring properties, as these may have fixed or determined
boundaries. We will then advise you of our findings.
It is also very useful to obtain a historical perspective and
build up the picture over time. We can help you to obtain this
not just through plans, but also through maps, photographs, aerial
photographs and where necessary, by contacting former owners
and occupants of the disputed land.
- We will always recommend that
you try to speak with your neighbour honestly and openly about
the issue. If you have some idea of where the boundary may be,
you should explain those thoughts with your neighbour and show
them how you have come to that conclusion. How that conversation
goes will then determine what steps you should take next. We
would also recommend that you follow up any such conversation
with a written letter so that you have some form of evidence
of what was discussed.
- Agree with your neighbour the
exact line of the boundary. You can then jointly appoint us to
submit a Determined Boundary Application at the Land Registry
for you. We would instruct an architect / boundary surveyor to
prepare a Land Registry compliant plan, which accurately shows
the precise line of the agreed boundary. We would then seek to
file the plan at the Land Registry together with the application.
A Determined Boundary Application would result in both properties
boundaries being specifically set out in registration documents.
If the application shows a clear difference in what is on the
title plan then the Land Registry may well decide to carry out
a survey of the properties and prepare an up to date title plan.
If the changes don't significantly (what is significant will
be decided by Land Registry) affect the plan then the existing
plan will remain, but an additional note will be included in
the register referring to the Agreement and any plan appended
to it.
Few Licensed conveyancers and architects, and not all solicitors
will be aware of the Determined Boundary procedure and the Land
Registry's strict requirements when submitting these. We can
therefore advise the architect of the Land Registry's exact requirements
of what should/should not be included on the plan. For example,
the Land Registry will refuse an application where the plan is
filed at the wrong scale, with too much annotation or with a
disclaimer.
Sometimes, it is also helpful for the application to be supported
by a Deed of Agreement, signed by both parties setting out precisely
what has been agreed. We will recommend that a Deed is entered
into where specific measurements, maintenance details, restrictions
on use etc. are agreed. We can draft the Deed of Agreement for
you and ensure that it sufficiently and accurately covers both
parties' intentions.
- If neither party has any idea
where the boundary should be and would prefer a professional
opinion, we can instruct a boundary surveyor to 'determine' the
boundary in his/her professional opinion. You can choose to wait
and see what their findings are and then decide between you what
steps to take. Alternatively, we can draft an agreement entered
by both parties stating that you will be bound by the surveyor's
findings and that a Determined Boundary application accompanied
by a Deed of Agreement in accordance with the surveyors findings
will be filed at Land Registry (again we can prepare the Agreement
and file the application on your behalf).
- If you believe you know where
the boundary is but are not able to contact your neighbour or
do not know who they are, we can nonetheless still file an application
at Land Registry for a Determined Boundary. The Land Registry
will forward a copy of your application to the neighbouring property,
giving the owner an opportunity to respond with their comments.
If no response is received, the application will be accepted.
If the owner of that property responds but disputes some or all
of the application, then an opportunity to agree matters will
be provided. Otherwise the matter will be referred to the Land
Registry Adjudicator for them to deal. We can then assist you
to liaise with your neighbour and hopefully remedy the disputed
issues or advise you in dealing with and responding to the Adjudicator.
- Where the situation proves contentious
(the possibility of a legal dispute) we will advise you of all
the pros and cons of litigation including carefully explaining
to you the steps to be taken and the costs involved.
Whether it is in person, in writing between solicitors, or with
the assistance of an experienced Mediator, we will always suggest
seeking to negotiate with a neighbour one last time before Issuing
proceedings.
Once proceedings are issued, and following the initial stages
of the claim, the court will also recommend staying proceedings
(putting them on hold) for a period of one month, whilst the
parties seek to find an agreeable solution. If during the one
month stay, you are able to settle the issues, the court can
make an order in the terms agreed. If you are not able to settle
your issues, proceedings will recommence. It is worth noting
that judges will frown upon a party that refuses to accept a
one month stay and show a real attempt at settling outside of
court. The judge will warn both parties of the financial and
personal risks of pursuing the claim in court any further.
Recent Court of Appeal decisions have highlighted the sometimes
desperate nature of parties in the pursuit of boundary disputes,
which leaves them in jeopardy of having to pay tens of thousands
of pounds (sometimes hundreds) in legal and professional costs.
A number of cases over the past few years highlight the inconsistent
approach to boundary disputes adopted by trial judges and the
higher courts.
In both Ali v Lane [2006] EWCA Civ 1532 and Haycocks v Neville
[2007] EWCA Civ 78 the Court of Appeal held that it was ok to
consider extrinsic evidence and subsequent conduct of parties
when determining the position of the boundary.
The case of Charalambous v Welding [2009] EWCA Civ 1578 had almost
identical facts to Haycocks but the County Court judge adopted
an approach that couldn't be more different. Here, the judge
did not consider the extrinsic evidence, such as topographical
features and instead focused almost entirely on the Land Registry
plans and the fact that he could not see evidence of a boundary
agreement.
In Bowler v Wallis (Court of Appeal, 19 May 2010), the trial
judge considered an agreement within the original conveyance
but also placed great importance upon common sense, the likelihood
of another person making the same decision and health and safety
considerations when handing down judgment. The Court of Appeal
later disagreed with their methodology and adopted the more traditional
approach of only considering the agreement within the original
conveyance to determine where the boundary line was.
These differing approaches are the reason why we will always
warn our clients that there really is no way of ever being certain
as to how a judge might decide on a case. We will therefore suggest
court action as a final option once all other options have been
exhausted.
We have a specialist team with
much experience in dealing with boundary matters, which are happy
to help and advise you. If you require their assistance, please
feel free to call us on 01245 216 050.
|
|
Lasting Powers of Attorney
- The Mental Capacity Act comes
into force on the 1st October 2007. With effect from that date
Enduring Powers of Attorney will no longer be valid documents
for individuals to enter into, although any Enduring Powers of
Attorney entered into prior to the 1st October 2007 will remain
valid subject to appropriate registration if the need arises.
- Lasting Powers of Attorney are
intended to give people more choice to plan ahead for the future
but with appropriate safeguards built in. These documents are
however more complex and hence more costly than an Enduring Power
of Attorney.
- A Lasting Power of Attorney
enables people to set out their wishes in a comprehensive way.
There are in addition rigorous safeguards and in particular a
Lasting Power of Attorney must be registered with the Office
of the Public Guardian (which with effect from the 1st October
2007 replaces the Public Guardianship Office) before use. A central
register will be kept of all Lasting Powers of Attorney which
means that it will then be easy for anyone to check the validity
of a document presented to them. This is intended to prevent
fraud and abuse.
- In addition to the above up
to five people are to be notified when the Lasting Power of Attorney
is submitted for registration. This is again a crucial safeguard
to allow any of those individuals to object to the registration
if they suspect that the person granting the power of attorney
was unduly pressurised into making it.
- A further safeguard is that
a certificate will need to be provided to confirm that at the
time the power was drawn up the person granting it was fully
aware of what he or she was doing and that no undue pressure
was placed upon that person. The certificate can be completed
by a range of people, including someone who has known the individual
concerned for at least 2 years. If the person granting the power
does not name anyone to be notified (as indicated above) in the
application for registration, then two certificate providers
are required as a safeguard.
- Enduring Powers of Attorney
were widely recommended for use by a full range of people because
they were easy and cheap to complete. Furthermore an Enduring
Power of Attorney only needed to be registered once the individual
concerned became mentally incapable. A Lasting Power of Attorney
will require registration straight away and this will significantly
increase the costs, and it therefore remains to be seen, on cost
grounds, whether there documents will be as popular as Enduring
Powers of Attorney.
|
|
Energy Performance Certificates
Seller's responsibility
for EPC
For existing buildings that are to be sold, the building's owner
is responsible for ensuring a certificate is made available to
all prospective purchasers at the earliest opportunity.
For the marketed sales of homes, including homes marketed before
they are physically complete, Home Information Pack (HIP) regulations
will apply. Where a HIP is required an Energy Performance Certificate
will follow and must be contained within the HIP.
Homes sold without marketing for sale e.g. by private treaty
between family members or Local Authority housing will require
an EPC on sale from 1 October 2008.
Commercial Buildings
The sale of Commercial buildings which extend beyond an area
of 500m will require an EPC from 6 April 2008. All remaining
commercial buildings will require an EPC on sale from 1 October
2008.
When should the EPC
be provided?
The EPC and recommendation
report must be made available free of charge by the seller or
landlord to a prospective buyer or tenant at the earliest opportunity
and no later than:
- when any written information
about the building is provided in response to a request for information
received from the prospective buyer; or
- when a viewing is conducted;
or
- if neither of those occur, before
entering into a contract to sell or let.
When Is an EPC
not required?
An energy performance
certificate does not have to be made available if:
- the seller believes that the
prospective buyer or tenant is unlikely to have sufficient funds
to purchase or rent the property or is not genuinely interested
in buying or renting that type of property; or
- the seller or landlord is unlikely
to be prepared to sell or rent out the property to the prospective
buyer or tenant (although this does not authorise unlawful discrimination)
Where a Home Information Pack
is required, any written property particulars prepared for prospective
home purchasers must either be accompanied by the whole EPC (but
not the recommendation report) or include the graphs which show
the energy rating of the building.
|
|
Trusts and Settlements
The Finance Act 2004 and
recently decided cases in the House of Lords and the Privy Council
have far reaching consequences for clients who are trustees,
beneficiaries or settlors of both onshore (those created under
the laws of the UK and/or controlled and managed in the UK) and
off-shore trusts (those created under the laws of a jurisdiction
other than the UK and/or controlled and managed in a jurisdiction
other than the UK). It is not just inheritance schemes entered
into after 1984 that are now under scrutiny. These rules apply
whether the trust is used in conjunction with a company or not.
THE PREVIOUS SITUATION
Previously, onshore and off-shore trust and corporate structures
were thought, as a consequence of court decisions and the statements
of professional advisers, to mitigate inheritance and capital
gains tax. The changes in legislation and case law summarised
below show that in many cases this might no longer be the case.
SO HOW HAS THIS CHANGED?
In general terms, under the Finance Act 2004, if the settlor
retains any benefit from the trust it remains part of his or
her estate. These provisions are retrospective and apply to any
trust created after1984. This Act must be read subject to the
two major cases mentioned below
.
The House of Lords decision in R v Dimsey and R v Allen (11/10/2001
UKHL 45 and 46) has unequivocally stated that anyone who is perceived
by the revenue to have a 'benefit in kind' or to be taking part
in the 'control and management' of a trust or offshore company
can be held to be a 'shadow director' or a 'shadow trustee'.
The effect of this is that the legality and any protection offered
by the structure may be lost. Any act of concealment of any beneficial
interest or benefit in kind has been held to be an act of control
and management and, of course, may constitute a criminal offence.
So called 'excluded property' or 'excluded asset trusts' may
no longer be effective whether set up onshore or off-shore.
Discretionary trusts both onshore
and off-shore may be scrutinised since the Privy Council decision
in Schmidt v Rosewood Trust Ltd. (27/03/03 UKPC 26). The court
can question the exercise of the discretion of the trustee including
the vesting of the assets as to whether they are reasonable or
not thereby reducing the effectiveness of the trustee's discretion.
These decisions go further than the Finance Act 2004 itself.
Anyone who is associated with
assets falling within the above types of structure may need to
reconsider their position and take fresh legal advice. One solution
may be the use of the private international law vehicle known
as the 'private foundation'. This is an internationally recognised
lawful structure that may, if properly constituted, exclude the
revenue's jurisdiction to tax assets. It may therefore provide
a lawful solution where the trust can no longer do so and prove
a cost effective way of restructuring any type of property holding
and provide effective lawful estate planning.
|
|
Joint Ventures & Distribution Agency
A few recent Court of
Appeal decisions have highlighted the scope of Commercial Agents.
These decisions have given guidance to the extent to which regulations
can be used by self-employed, intermediaries or consultants to
successfully obtain remuneration from defaulting companies. Other
recent developments illustrate the fact that the rate of commission
which the parties may not have included in an agreement can be
assessed or determined by the Court.
The most recent decision was
that of Lonsdale v Howard & Hallam Limited. The Claimant
in that case, Mr. Graham Lonsdale, was a commercial agent for
the Defendant Howard & Hallam Limited. As a result of the
termination of the Agency by the Company Howard & Hallam
Limited, the Commercial Agent Mr. Lonsdale made a claim for compensation.
Howard & Hallam had determined that Mr. Lonsdale's compensation
should be in the sum of £7,500.00. However Mr. Lonsdale
did not agree and began proceedings in the Oxford County Court
for the sum of £19,670.00 which was equivalent to two years
gross commission. The relevant law was interpreted by the Court
of Appeal as not dealing with the way in which compensation should
be assessed. The Court considered the decision of King &
Tunnock and that decision concluded that what is compensated
is the termination of its relationship not future losses. It
is therefore important to remember as a result or consequence
of termination of an Agency that the principal will not be liable
to damages as one would normally interpret them under a breach
of contract claim. The Court of appeal dismissed Mr. Lonsdale's
appeal stating that whilst the award of compensation was very
broad it was not too low in the light of the evidence regarding
the commercial relationship between the parties. The commercial
relationship between the parties was such that the Company Howard
& Hallam had been suffering severe losses prior to it terminating
its relationship with its commercial agent and the Court determined
that this was a necessary factor to be taken into account in
the assessment of compensation.
The internet boom is certainly
not over and although the high levels of activity of start ups
in the late 90's both in the USA and in this country will not
be repeated the software distribution and Value Added Reseller
agreements are still vital tools for any corporation or business
to protect themselves against infringement. The overriding considerations
for corporate clients will be the desire to protect their legal
and contractual rights by drafting an agreement which is capable
of being understood, staying within budget for legal fees, anticipated
legal problems and future issues such as assignment, mergers
or acquisitions and anticipating internationally issues as well
as domestic considerations. We can provide Distribution or Agency
agreements to cater for most clients needs and to save the cost
of litigation although this cannot always be avoided. It is vital
that advice is sought at the most earliest stages of undertaking
operations in the United Kingdom and European Union.
|
|
Offshore Financial Centres
There have been rapid
developments in the reporting of activities connected to Offshore
Financial Centres and these Centres remain at the forefront of
efficient tax planning. It is common misconception that the answer
to all the UK residents tax issues is to either incorporate or
set up an Offshore Company to legitimately avoid taxation, or
merely to move to an Offshore jurisdiction. The latter is by
far more the most efficient tax planning method but it should
be emphasized that some taxation will still be payable if the
UK resident has income which is generated within the UK.
A significant development in
connection with Trusts is that as a result of the Chancellors
Budget new rules apply from the 22nd March 2006 regarding the
Inheritance tax treatment of Accumulation and Maintenance Trusts
and Interest in Possession Trusts. The rules align the Inheritance
tax treatment of the majority of such Trust with the treatment
of discretionary Trusts. What these new rules basically do is
to curtail significantly the use by UK residents of Trusts for
the avoidance of tax.
The tax treatment of non-UK residents
is entirely different to that of UK residents and here there
are a variety of schemes or plans which can be utilised in order
to cushion the effects of taxation. The International Trust concept
where the settler creates a valid Trust with property or assets
held in the UK in an Offshore legal entity such as the British
Virgin Islands etc, is still an important and effective solution
for non-UK residents to protect UK assets. It is important to
emphasise as with all planning on tax issues that it is crucial
for the client to obtain guidance on establishing the most appropriate
ownership structure for his or her circumstances. The issues
which are relevant in making the decision are; the residence
of the client and his spouse, whether or not the parties are
likely to live in the UK long enough to be deemed residents in
the UK for Inheritance tax purposes, the value of the property
and the value of any improvements; whether or not it is a cash
purchase and for what period each year will the property be occupied
by the client and his family. It is once again the residence
of the client which is of crucial significance. If he or she
is here for less than 90 days a year he/she will not be treated
for UK income purposes as being resident and the traditional
Trust Company should be employed. This is subject to the caveat
that any activity by the client should be avoided which may be
construed or interpreted as generating income from a Company
in the UK. Once again it is important to emphasize that as in
the case of any tax planning, adequate time should be allowed
to access the best legal advice.
|
|
Useful tips when Letting
your property
(OR PURCHASING
A LET PROPERTY)
- If you are granting a shorthold
tenancy make sure that the agreement covers all the terms you
have agreed with your Tenants. Anything you have agreed which
is not incorporated within the formal agreement may not be enforceable.
- If you are buying a property
to Let with the assistance of a Mortgage make sure that you comply
with all mortgage conditions applicable to Letting the property.
- Sometimes it is more cost effective
to grant a Shorthold tenancy for 12 months with a break option
for either party to terminate after 6 months. This can save the
cost and aggravation of renewing the tenancy.
- If the property is tenanted
when purchased, serve a Section 21 Notice under the Landlord
and Tenant Act immediately following your purchase of the investment
property. This will give you the option to terminate the Tenancy
at the earliest moment should the tenant not work out.
- If you are letting your own
property, serve a Section 21 Notice shortly after granting the
tenancy for the same reasons as identified above.
- There are two forms of Section
21 Notices. Make sure that you use the correct form of Notice
as this could affect your application for possession of the property.
- A Section 21 Notice must give
a minimum of 2 calendar months notice to your Tenant.
- You cannot terminate an Assured
Shorthold Tenancy earlier than the end date specified in the
Tenancy Agreement without a valid reason.
- If the Tenant still does not
depart from the property at the expiry of the Section 21 Notice
then court proceedings for possession can be commenced. These
can take up to 3 months before a result is achieved.
- If you have taken court proceeding
against your tenants do not demand and/or accept any payment
of rents otherwise you may prejudice your position. The rent
due over this period should be dealt with as part of the court
proceedings.
|
|
Health & Safety:
More onus on you
The Health & Safety
Executive (HSE) has now introduced revised regulations (CDM 2007)
which came into force on 6th April 2007.
This revision is clearly aimed
at reducing accidents and ill health in the construction industry.
In domestic cases building owners
still have no such particular duties, but designers and contractors
must comply with CDM 2007.
On larger commercial projects
clients, designers, and contractors have additional duties. For
example the client must appoint a CDM Co-ordinator (the successor
to the Planning Supervisor) and a Principal Contractor. There
now has to be a Construction Phase Plan and at the end of the
project a Health and Safety file which, as before, is handed
over to the client.
Under the new regulations there
is a much wider definition of design, which now extends not only
to operations but also to the co-ordination of design works.
Designer includes for these purposes a quantity surveyor. In
every major building project a Senior Co-ordinator must now be
appointed.
The party who commissions the
design is the party responsible. Complex issues may arise under
the new regulations, for instance where a contractor takes over
another's work based on a prior design and the employer uses
this to his detriment and cost. At Common Law the contractor
may remain responsible, except where he uses JCT 2005 with the
express reservation that he is not responsible for checking the
design.
Other changes include the renaming
of the pre-construction phase Health and Safety Plan which is
now called the Pre-construction information.
Here the onus is on clients to
ensure that others are responsible for checking the Health and
Safety arrangements.
No work can start on site unless
until the Health and Safety Plan has been prepared.
Importantly where design has
been carried out abroad, the person commissioning that design
will be responsible for compliance under CDM 2007 and if the
designer is not within Great Britain then the client will be
responsible for the design.
These regulations extend to all
contractors so that contractors are responsible for ensuring
that before the start of a project suitable welfare provisions
exist on site and will continue throughout the project. The client
also has a duty to ensure that such arrangements are made prior
to start on site.
In summary a tightening up of
the regulations with fewer escape routes.
|
|
Access to Neighbouring Land Act 1992
The Act enables anyone
who needs to carry out works on their property ("dominant
land") which can not be done without access to adjoining
land ("servient land") to obtain that access subject
to obtaining an Access Order from the Court.
The applicant must:
- Be the person who needs to enter
the servient land; and
- Need, but does not have, consent
to enter.
The Court must be satisfied before
making an Access Order that:
- The works are reasonably necessary
for the preservation of the whole or part of the dominant land;
and
- The works cannot be carried
out, or would be substantially more difficult to carry out, without
access to the servient land.
The Court will not make an Access
Order where:
- The use or enjoyment of the
servient land by the owner or occupier would be disturbed; or
- The owner or occupier of the
servient land would suffer hardship to such a degree that it
would be unreasonable to make the Order
Basic preservation works include:
- Maintenance, repair or renewal
of any part of a building;
- Clearance, repair or renewal
of any drain, sewer, pipe or cable;
- Treatment, cutting back, felling,
removal or replacement of foliage which is, or is in danger of
becoming, damaged, diseased, dangerous, insecurely rooted or
dead;
- Filling in or clearance of any
ditch.
Works may be considered reasonably
necessary for the preservation of the dominant land even if they
involve:
- Alteration, adjustment or improvement
to the dominant land; or
- Demolition of the whole or part
of a building.
An Access Order will specify:
- The works which may be carried
out by entering the servient land;
- The particular area of the servient
land that may be entered; and
- The date on which, or period
during which, the servient land may be entered.
An Access Order may:
- Impose such terms and conditions
the Court considers reasonably necessary to avoid or restrict
any loss or inconvenience;
- Require the payment of a fee
to the owner or occupier of the servient land for access;
- Require the applicant to pay
other costs, such as the costs incurred by the owner or occupier
of the servient land for dealing with the Court application.
|
|
These briefing notes should not be regarded
as constituting legal advice in relation to particular circumstances.
These briefing notes are merely a general comment on the relevant
Law. If specific advice is required in connection with any of
the matters covered by any of these notes, please contact the office for assistance. |
For more information or to arrange an informal discussion, please
Contact Us:
Alexander
Lawyers LLP is authorised and regulated by the solicitors regulation
authority. Organisation number 00448723
Registered Office Address Bervale House, 35-37 Moulsham Street,
Chelmsford, Essex CM2 0HY
Registered in England & Wales. Partnership No. OC323194.
VAT. No. 888 6853 40. |