UUÂãÁÄÖ±²¥

View the related checklists about Business Day

Defendant receiving a claimant's Part 36 offer—checklist

Defendant receiving a claimant's Part 36 offer—checklist This checklist on receiving a Part 36 offer identifies the key factors that a defendant should consider on receipt of a claimant’s Part 36 offer. Consideration Guidance Further information Relevant period The defendant should calculate the date when the relevant period expires for accepting the claimant’s Part 36 offer, which must be no less than 21 days from when the Part 36 offer was served (CPR 36.5(1)(c)).It is important to note this date because there may be costs consequences for late acceptance of the claimant’s Part 36 offer. There will also be costs consequences if the claimant’s Part 36 offer is not accepted and the claimant obtains a judgment that is at least as advantageous as their own Part 36 offer (CPR 36.17(1)(b)). For further information, see Practice Notes: Part 36 offers—how to make a valid Part 36 offer—The relevant period (minimum 21 days) and Part 36 offers—costs consequences of rejection or non-acceptance—Costs consequences—defendant not accepting a claimant's Part 36 offer. Validity...

Timetable—hostile offer

Timetable—hostile offer This is a detailed timetable for a hostile takeover offer. It has been compiled by reference to the provisions of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers (Code) and relevant statutory rules. The timetable covers the steps leading up to the announcement of a firm intention to make an offer (Rule 2.7 announcement) up until the completion of any ‘squeeze-out’ procedure. Changes can occur to the timetable: for example, document preparation may take a shorter time than planned or the emergence of a rival offer may cause the timetable to default to that of the competing offeror. For other examples of timetables used on takeover transactions, see: • Timetable—recommended offer • Timetable—scheme of arrangement Public company takeovers quiz: Part 3 of our public company takeovers quiz includes questions which tests users’ knowledge of the new offer timetable for takeover transactions. The quiz is in multiple choice format and at the end of each question the correct answer is displayed together with feedback and links to relevant materials. The...

View the related practice notes about Business Day

Dealing with a recruitment agency—checklist

Dealing with a recruitment agency—checklist STOP PRESS: The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has published draft guidance on keeping employment records and recruitment and selection which is open for consultation until 5 March 2024, and has also removed the employment practices code (first published in March 2022, and last updated in November 2011) and supplementary guidance from its employment information page. For more information, see Q&A: What is the status of the ICO employment practices code? and ICO removes employment practices code and related guidance from its Employment information guidance page, LNB News 15/12/2023 112. This Practice Note will be updated once the ICO draft guidance is finalised. Employers who are using a recruitment agency or executive search (or 'headhunting') service will need to consider the implications of: • the Employment Agencies Act 1973 and the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003 (as amended) • the Equality Act 2010, which contains specific provisions relating to discrimination by recruitment agencies • Assimilated...

Publication of offer documentation

Publication of offer documentation Who does what? This Practice Note is part of the Corporate toolkit for public company takeovers. For a more detailed Practice Note on publishing information during the course of a takeover, see Practice Note: Provision of information during an offer. The lawyers would normally not be directly involved in the publication of the offer documentation, but would instead assist in the preparation of the relevant documentation and advising the parties on the publication requirements. Typically, the printers would be responsible for the distribution of hard copy documentation such as the offer document and forms of acceptance, the financial advisers or public relations advisers would deal with the publication of information via a regulatory information service (RIS) and the offeror and the offeree would deal with any information required to be published on their respective websites. Manner of sending documents Any announcement required to be published under the Code must be published via an RIS. If an announcement is published at a time when the...

View the related precedents about Business Day

Completion date definition

Clause for sale of public house or hotel

Licensing 1 Definitions Business the [insert number ] [star] hotel business operated by the Seller at the Property providing for [accommodation type] [sale food and beverage] [weddings] [conference centre] [leisure centre] [spa] [golf course] [haird

View the related q&as about Business Day

Under the new Insolvency Rules is there still a requirement for service of an application on prescribed persons to be made not less than five business days before the date fixed for the hearing?

Under the new Insolvency Rules is there still a requirement for service of an application on prescribed persons to be made not less than five business days before the date fixed for the hearing? STOP PRESS: From 6 April 2017, the Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925 were revoked and replaced by the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024. The content in this Q&A may have been affected by this change. The previous rule, rule 2.8(1) of the Insolvency Rules 1986, SI 1986/1925 (SI 1986/1925, r 2.8(1)), does not appear to be directly replicated in the new rules, so there is no equivalent of the five-day service requirement and it is not dealt with in SI 1986/1925, Sch 4. The updated version of IR 1986, SI 1986/1925, r 2.8 is to be found at rule 3.8 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016, SI 2016/1024 (SI 2016/1024, r 3.8). However, the

Where an outsourcing agreement provides that the transferor is responsible for employment-related liabilities arising ‘on or before the transfer date’, does this mean that, if the transferee terminates the employment of a relevant employee on the transfer date itself the transferor might be liable for the termination costs?

Where an outsourcing agreement provides that the transferor is responsible for employment-related liabilities arising ‘on or before the transfer date’, does this mean that, if the transferee terminates the employment of a relevant employee on the transfer date itself the transferor might be liable for the termination costs? Position under TUPE 2006 Under regulation 3(1)(a) of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE 2006), SI 2006/246, a business transfer occurs where there is: • a transfer of an undertaking or business (or part of an undertaking or business) • situated immediately before the transfer in the UK • to another person • where there is a transfer • of an economic entity • and the economic entity retains its identity after the transfer For further information, see Practice Note: TUPE—business transfers. Under TUPE 2006, SI 2006/246, reg 3(1)(b), a service provision change takes place where: • activities cease to be carried out by a person ('a client') on his own behalf and are carried...

View the related News about Business Day

Employer deemed out of time in issuing a notification on the Monday after a Sunday deadline (My Contracts v 74 Hamilton Terrace)

Construction analysis: The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) granted a declaration sought by a contractor on how to interpret a clause stating a time limit for the employer to issue a notification relating to costs which the contractor was liable for, holding that, by issuing the notification the next day (which was a Monday) following the last date that the notification should have been issued (which was a Sunday), the employer was out of time. A major part of the reason for this was that the relevant provision did not include any reference to the period being calculated by ‘Business Days’.

EU Law weekly highlights—21 November 2024

This week's edition of EU Law weekly highlights includes analysis on the European AI Office’s draft General-Purpose AI Code of Practice, the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court decision confirming its international jurisdiction, the judgment that 3D inhaler trade mark cannot be restored by Boehringer, the ruling that Ukraine border service cannot get an EU trade mark for its war slogan, Meta being fined €798m for tying marketplace ads to Facebook, and the role of acceptable use policies in AI, In addition, this week the 2025 EU annual budget was agreed, the Council of the EU adopted a regulation to shut down European Online Dispute Resolution platform, adopted a ban on forced labour products in Union market, and approved the certification framework for carbon removals, the European Parliament endorsed the postponement of the deforestation rules, the European Commission proposed a single digital portal for posted worker declarations, and the EU Cyber Resilience Act and EU Listing Acts were published in the Official Journal.