Restitution Definition

GLOSSARY

Published by a UU��ֱ�� Commercial expert

What does Restitution mean?

Restitution is concerned with reversing one party’s unfair or unjust benefit at the expense of another party. The purpose of a claim of restitution, therefore, is not to compensate the claimant for a loss but to deprive the defendant of a benefit.

View the related checklists about Restitution

Sentencing Guidelines for Corporate offenders—Money laundering checklist

Sentencing Guidelines for Corporate offenders—Money laundering checklist This Checklist summarises the Sentencing Council’s guidelines for money laundering offences committed by a corporate (Money Laundering Guidelines). The Money Laundering Guidelines can be accessed here: • Magistrates’ Court Sentencing Guideline—Corporate offenders: fraud, bribery and money laundering—for use in cases involving corporates being sentenced in the magistrates’ court • Crown Court Sentencing Guideline—Corporate offenders: fraud, bribery and money laundering—for use in cases involving corporates being sentenced in the Crown Court The Sentencing Council also publishes a number of overarching guidelines, which should be considered in respect of all sentencing exercises. These include: • Totality guideline (Crown Court) • Totality guideline (magistrates’ court) • General guideline—overarching principles (Crown Court) • General guideline—overarching principles (magistrates’ court) • Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea (Crown Court) • Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea (magistrates’ court) For more information, see Practice Note: Sentences imposed following conviction. Among these overarching guidelines, the General guideline: overarching principles (the General guideline) is specifically designed...

No deal Brexit—jurisdiction under Brussels I (recast) (UK courts’ approach after exit day)—checklist [Archived]

No deal Brexit—jurisdiction under Brussels I (recast) (UK courts’ approach after exit day)—checklist [Archived] ARCHIVED: This Checklist has been archived and is not maintained. This Checklist considers how the UK courts will apply Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), which deals with the allocation of court jurisdiction for civil and commercial matters, if the UK leaves the EU on exit day with no deal, the so called ‘no deal Brexit’ scenario. Exit day is defined by section 20 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. The Checklist reviews the regulation’s articles, dealing with jurisdiction, and considers whether the UK courts will apply them and, if so, how. The application of those articles differs depending on whether the proceedings are commenced prior to exit day (with the jurisdictional dispute being determined after that date) or after exit day. The key UK regulation is The Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/479. This comes into force on exit day and contains various savings provisions and modifications to Regulation...

Which EU Member State court has jurisdiction?—checklist

Which EU Member State court has jurisdiction?—checklist This Checklist is for use when determining which EU Member State’s courts have jurisdiction to determine a dispute. It does this by considering the articles in Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) that can be applied to determine which court has jurisdiction to determine the dispute. The general rule is that a defendant should be sued in the courts of the EU Member State in which they are domiciled. However, a number of articles derogate from this rule with some being mandatory and others being applicable should the claimant seek to rely on that provision. The articles are applied in the hierarchy set out in the table. If the first article listed is not applicable, the next article should be considered to see if that is applicable and so on. Determining jurisdiction Type of jurisdiction Consideration Mandatory/by choice Brussels I (recast) Exclusive jurisdiction Certain prescribed circumstances provide for the courts of an EU Member State to have jurisdiction regardless of...

Misrepresentation—rescission as a remedy

Misrepresentation—rescission as a remedy This Practice Note sets out when and how an innocent party can rescind a contract for misrepresentation, why they would wish to do so and when rescission is not permissible. For guidance on when a party may recover damages for a misrepresentation or seek to limit/exclude liability for misrepresentation, see Practice Notes: • Misrepresentation—damages as a remedy • Misrepresentations—excluding and limiting liability for them Restitutionary payment consequent upon rescission The consequentials judgment of Baker J in Pisante v Logothetis considers in some detail the award of financial payment consequent upon the rescission of a transaction which the claimant had been induced to enter into by the defendants’ misrepresentation. In so doing the judge observed that: ‘28. [...] The complete undoing of the rescinded contract (restoration to the status quo ante) is a just response to the claimant’s proof that it was misled into giving its consent to that contract. It is not unfair or inequitable that, in certain circumstances, that can leave the claimant...

Discover our 351 Practice Notes on Restitution

Part 26A restructuring plan for SMEs

Part 26A restructuring plan for SMEs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALES COMPANIES LIST (CHD) IN THE MATTER OF [insert name of the Company] AND IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2006 BETWEEN [insert name of the Company] and THE PLAN CREDITORS [AND MEMBERS] (as defined herein) RESTRUCTURING PLAN (under Part 26A of the Companies Act 2006) DATED [insert date] RECITALS The Company (A) [Insert name of the Company] is a [private] limited company, incorporated in [England and Wales] with company number [insert company number] and office at [insert address] (the Company) Purpose of the Restructuring Plan (B) The purpose of this Restructuring Plan is to affect a compromise and arrangement between: [(i)] the Company and the Plan Creditors; [and (ii) the Company and the Members], in order to eliminate, reduce or prevent, or mitigate the effect of financial difficulties encountered [or likely to be encountered] by the Company that are affecting, or will...

Share purchase agreement—pro-buyer—corporate seller—conditional—long form

Share purchase agreement—pro-buyer—corporate seller—conditional—long form This Agreement is made on [insert day and month] 20[insert year] Parties 1 [Insert name of selling corporate entity] incorporated in [England and Wales OR [insert country of incorporation] OR with registered number [insert company number] whose registered office is at [insert address] (the Seller); 2 [Insert name of purchasing corporate entity] incorporated in England and Wales OR [insert country of incorporation] OR with registered number [insert company number] whose registered office is at [insert address] (the Buyer), and 3 [Insert name of guarantor entity] incorporated in England and Wales OR [insert country of incorporation]] with registered number [insert company number] whose registered office is at [insert address] (the Guarantor) [(each of the Seller, the Buyer and the Guarantor being a Party and together the Seller, the Buyer and the Guarantor are the Parties).] Background (A) The Company (as defined below) is a private company limited by shares and is incorporated in [England and...

Dive into our 33 Precedents related to Restitution

What is the common law position where a supplier of a service erroneously undercharges a customer for that service (eg due to miscalculation of the amount of service used at the fault of the supplier)? Is the supplier entitled to back-bill a customer for historic supplies which it has undercharged for, and is the customer obliged to make further payments? Is there any time limit?

What is the common law position where a supplier of a service erroneously undercharges a customer for that service (eg due to miscalculation of the amount of service used at the fault of the supplier)? Is the supplier entitled to back-bill a customer for historic supplies which it has undercharged for, and is the customer obliged to make further payments? Is there any time limit? In answering this question, we have assumed that you are referring to a services agreement between two businesses in an unregulated supply sector. The ability to recover sums under a commercial contract will depend on the terms of the contract relating to calculation of payments, invoicing and dispute resolution. For general information, see Practice Note: Price, payment terms and interest. If the contract introduces a process for agreeing invoices for services and agreeing these invoices as ‘final’ for parts of the work there is likely to be no right to go back to recover errors, regardless of the error. The nature of...

What recourse does a bank have if assets are disposed of in breach of the terms of the finance documents?

What recourse does a bank have if assets are disposed of in breach of the terms of the finance documents? Why is the restriction on asset disposals needed and what clauses should the bank consider in these circumstances? In a secured financing, the bank will be concerned to ensure that the value of its security is not reduced in any way during the term of the facility agreement, ensuring it maximises recoveries in the event it wants to enforce the security. Another key concern is that unless the bank can show sufficient control over any given secured asset, any purported fixed charge over that asset could be recharacterised as a floating charge. Therefore, it is usual for the bank to put restrictions into the facility agreement and related security documents preventing the borrower from selling, transferring or otherwise disposing of any of its assets during the term of the facility agreement without the consent of the bank. For more information, see Practice Note: Undertakings (covenants) —...

See the 78 Q&As about Restitution

Corporate Crime weekly highlights—5 December 2024

This week's edition of Corporate Crime weekly highlights includes analysis of the recently announced Independent Sentencing Review and the outcomes that can be expected from it, of the FCA’s updated internal whistleblowing policy following staff complaints and of some of the unique learning points from the failure to prevent fraud guidance and the likelihood of increased enforcement activity as a result of the offence. Also included is news of the new Supreme Court Rules and Practice Directions along with the launch of a new online case management system, of the EA’s guidance on appealing regulatory decisions and of a company being fined £1.6m for health and safety breaches. All this, and more, in this week’s Corporate Crime highlights.

Tax weekly highlights—28 November 2024

This week's edition of Tax weekly highlights includes: (1) the second reading of Finance Bill 2025, (2) confirmation of the date of the second reading of the NICs (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill, (3) the Upper Tribunal (UT) decision rejecting an application for permanent anonymity in HMRC v The Taxpayer, and (4) the publication of a HMRC Spotlight on Managed Service Companies.

Read the latest 744 News articles on Restitution

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.

Case studies

"UU��ֱ�� is great as I can find the answers I am looking for really quickly. I believe that nothing should be more than 6 clicks away - and the products from UU��ֱ�� deliver on this standard"

Avensure

Access all documents on Restitution

GET ACCESS NOW

Top

Trial

UU��ֱ��

GLOSSARY