³ÉÈËÓ°Òô

View the related checklists about Scott Schedule

Drafting a letter of claim for a construction or engineering dispute—checklist

Drafting a letter of claim for a construction or engineering dispute—checklist Note: • this Practice Note gives specific guidance on matters proceeding in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) under the provisions set out in CPR 60, CPR PD 60 and the TCC Guide. As these provisions are additional to the general provisions set out elsewhere in the CPR, this Practice Note should be read in conjunction with general guidance on preparing for and attending trial including that in Trial—overview which, in turn, links through to detailed guidance on specific aspects of preparing for and attending trials • shorter and flexible trials schemes—claims started on or after 1 October 2015 in the TCC may be suitable for and/or be subject to one or both of the schemes operating under CPR PD 57AB, namely the shorter trials scheme and/or the flexible trials scheme. For more information on these schemes, see Practice Notes: Business and Property Courts—shorter trials scheme and Business and Property Courts—flexible trials scheme • electronic working—for information on electronic...

View the related practice notes about Scott Schedule

Construction Pre-Action Protocol—letters of claim, response and meetings

Construction Pre-Action Protocol—letters of claim, response and meetings This Practice Note considers the requirements of the second edition of the Pre-Action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes (the Protocol) which must be complied with before parties can commence proceedings in respect of construction or engineering disputes (including professional negligence claims against architects, engineers and quantity surveyors). These requirements include the provision of a letter of claim, letter of response and reply to any counterclaim, as well as attendance at a without prejudice meeting. Guidance and practical considerations for each step are also covered, as well as other provisions in the Protocol, such as objections to jurisdiction, the use of expert evidence, and the ability to extend the time for compliance. A summary of the key steps that the parties must undertake is also set out in: Key steps for compliance with Construction Pre-Action Protocol—checklist. It is important to be aware that the parties do not need to follow the process prescribed by the Protocol if they agree not to,...

Civil contempt proceedings—false statements

Civil contempt proceedings—false statements This Practice Note considers when contempt proceedings under CPR 81 (also referred to as ‘committal proceedings’) can be brought against someone for the making of a false statement and the process to be adopted in bringing such proceedings. This includes when permission is required to make such an application, and when the court is likely to grant such permission, and the timing of such an application. It also considers what must be proved for the contempt application to be successful. This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Civil contempt proceedings—nature and legal framework giving a general overview of these types of proceedings. Permission from the court is required Permission from the court is required where the contempt application is made in relation to knowingly making a false statement in any affidavit, affirmation or other document verified by a statement of truth or in a disclosure statement (CPR 81.3(5)(b)). It is common in contempt cases that a particular allegation may straddle more...

View the related precedents about Scott Schedule

Scott Schedule—defects

Scott Schedule—defects No. Defect Term of contract Breached Remedial cost Defendant’s response Judge’s comments 1 Serious corrosion appearing

Dilapidations pre-action protocol—the response

Dilapidations pre-action protocol—the response The response to a quantified demand under the Dilapidations pre-action protocol is case specific, but the following notes will assist you through the process. Format of the Response The response is dealt with at paragraph 5 of the Dilapidations Protocol. A tenant should respond using the Schedule of Dilapidations prepared by the landlord’s surveyor. If correctly prepared it will be in a Scott schedule format and there will be a column for the tenant’s comments. The responses to each item should be set out in enough detail for the landlord to clearly see the tenant’s views. Endorsement The response should be endorsed by the tenant or the surveyor preparing it. If the endorsement is given by the tenant’s surveyor, they should have regard to the principles laid down in the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors’ Guidance Note on Dilapidations. The endorsement can be given either by the surveyor in their own name or ‘for and on behalf of’ XX firm or company, if...

View the related q&as about Scott Schedule

What remedies are available to cohabitants or former cohabitants where they are not able to agree the ownership of personal belongings (chattels) including those of a child?

What remedies are available to cohabitants or former cohabitants where they are not able to agree the ownership of personal belongings (chattels) including those of a child? Personal belongings are viewed as chattels by the courts. Ideally, the division of chattels should be agreed by way of a schedule denoting the destination of items. Unless the value of the chattel is significant, the court may be reluctant to deal with such issues on the basis of proportionality. If the division of chattels cannot be agreed, then a Scott Schedule should be prepared to include the reasons (briefly) why a particular item is sought be a party. See K v K (ancillary relief: property division). Where an agreement cannot be reached, and it is considered proportionate, an expert may be instructed to value the assets. See Practice Note: Valuation of assets in financial proceedings. Where there are no existing financial proceedings, and the parties wish the court to adjudicate a dispute as to chattels, an application will...

What is the authority for the Family Court to make a final non-molestation order without findings having been made regarding allegations of abuse and with no admissions from the respondent?

What is the authority for the Family Court to make a final non-molestation order without findings having been made regarding allegations of abuse and with no admissions from the respondent? Non-molestation orders are governed by section 42 of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996). A non-molestation order is an order containing a provision prohibiting a person from molesting another person who is associated with them and/or from molesting a relevant child. The court can make such an order on the application of an associated person whether or not in other family proceedings or in any family proceedings without an application if the court considers the order should be made for the benefit of any other party to the proceedings or a relevant child. By FLA 1996, s 42(5), the court, in deciding whether to exercise its powers and if so in what manner, shall have regard to all the circumstances including the need to secure the health, safety and well-being of the applicant and of any...

View the related News about Scott Schedule

Construction weekly highlights—30 January 2025

This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes analysis of cases where the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) found a ‘building safety risk’ which could lead to the making of a ‘building liability order’ under the Building Safety Act 2022 (381 Southwark Park Road v Click St Andrews), where the Court of Session enforced an adjudicator’s award following ‘Smash and Grab’ adjudication proceedings (ATG Services v Ogilvie), where the TCC gave valuable guidance on payment notices, pay less notices, and default payment notices (Placefirst v Car Construction), and where the Court of Appeal (CoA) dismissed an appeal related to the High Court’s calculation of damages where the claimant’s mitigation actions resulted in an increased benefit to the company, as well as the Cabinet Office’s update on the final preparations for the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023) coming into force on 24 February 2025, and publication by HM Treasury (HMT) of a working paper on its 10 Year Infrastructure Strategy.

Employment weekly highlights—10 October 2024

This week’s edition of Employment weekly highlights includes: (1) the Employment Rights Bill 2024 and the government’s ‘next steps’, including commentary from Adam Turner, Partner at Mishcon de Reya, Blair Adams, Partner at Hill Dickinson, Sarah Taylor, Senior Knowledge Lawyer at Stevens & Bolton, Tessa Cranfield, Partner at King & Spalding LLP and Catriona Aldridge, Partner at CMS LLP, (2) Acas guidance on tips and service charges, (3) the Investment Association’s updated executive pay guidelines, (4) analysis from David Smith (partner) and Melissa Beer (knowledge lawyer) at DLA Piper UK LLP of the Supreme Court decision on the status of part-time football referees for tax purposes, (5) a new data protection audit framework from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), (6) a European Commission report on the functioning of the EU-US Data Privacy Framework, (7) European Data Protection Board adoption of guidelines on EU GDPR personal data processing, (8) an opinion on controllers’ obligations when relying on processors, and a statement on proposed amendments to enforcement of EU GDPR, (9) a...