header-logo header-logo

03 June 2016
Issue: 7701 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Look, no notice

Notice of enforcement by an enforcement agent or bailiff under the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 may be reduced by the court from seven clear days if satisfied it is likely that goods will otherwise be removed or disposed of. If reduced, what would be a suitable notice period? One minute? Indeed, what would be the purpose of any notice where that likelihood exists?

A court will need to be persuaded that the power to reduce the period of notice is necessary rather than merely convenient especially bearing in mind that the application will be without notice. In some cases, the evidence might well justify a reduction of the notice period to nil. In the absence of any rules of procedure to the contrary, the court’s discretion will include a power to attach conditions to the notice. For example, the reduction of the period of the notice to nil might be subject to a condition that the goods are to be secured under reg 16 or 17 but not removed for a fixed period or, given the possible implications of Art 8 of the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll