Next Wins Equal Pay Appeal: What Employers and Employees Need to Know

Equal pay disputes are not limited to employees doing the same job. A worker may be able to compare their pay with someone carrying out a completely different role if the two jobs are nevertheless regarded as being of equal value.

The recent Employment Appeal Tribunal decision in Next Retail Limited and Next Distribution Limited v Miss M Thandi and others [2026] EAT 130 provides an important reminder of how these rules work in practice, particularly where different parts of a workforce are paid different rates because of recruitment pressures, market conditions or operational requirements.

Next succeeded in overturning an earlier finding that it could not justify the difference in basic pay between its retail sales consultants and warehouse operatives. However, the Next equal pay appeal case does not establish that employers are free to pay different rates simply by referring to “market forces”.

The employer must still be able to identify and evidence the genuine reason for the difference and, where the difference puts one sex at a particular disadvantage, show that the arrangement is objectively justified.

Written by Peggy Lim, Solicitor

What happened in the Next case?

The claims were brought by thousands of Next retail sales consultants, most of whom were women. They compared themselves with warehouse operatives who received higher rates of basic pay.

An earlier Employment Tribunal decision had already determined that the work performed by the relevant retail employees was of equal value to the work performed by the warehouse comparators. That finding was not overturned on appeal.

The later dispute was therefore about whether Next could lawfully justify paying the warehouse employees more.

Next relied on a number of factors, including market rates, difficulties recruiting and retaining warehouse staff, the operational demands of its warehouses and wider business considerations. The Employment Appeal Tribunal concluded that, in relation to basic pay, the evidence showed that Next had paid higher rates in the warehouses because it needed to do so to recruit and retain sufficient staff. Those particular pressures did not apply in the same way to the retail workforce.

The important point is that the decision turned on the actual reason for the higher pay and the evidence supporting that reason.

What does “equal pay” mean?

The equal pay provisions are principally contained in the Equality Act 2010.

The law provides protection where a person is receiving less favourable contractual terms than a comparator of the opposite sex who is performing equal work.

Equal work can include:

Like work – where the jobs are the same or broadly similar and any differences are not practically important.
Work rated as equivalent – where the jobs have been rated as equivalent under an analytical job evaluation scheme.
Work of equal value – where the jobs may be different but nevertheless place equal demands on the workers by reference to matters such as effort, skill and decision-making.

This means that different job titles do not necessarily prevent an equal pay claim.

A shop-floor employee, administrator, cleaner, warehouse operative or other worker could potentially compare their role with a very different job if the demands of the two roles are shown to be equivalent.

The assessment is concerned with the work actually carried out, rather than simply the wording of a job title or contract.

When can an employer lawfully pay different rates?

Equal work does not automatically mean that every difference in pay is unlawful.

Under section 69 of the Equality Act 2010, an employer may rely on the material factor defence where it can show that the difference is caused by a genuine factor which is not direct sex discrimination.

Depending on the circumstances, this may include recruitment and retention difficulties, genuine market-rate differences, particular skills or qualifications, geographical location, unsocial hours, additional responsibilities, productivity requirements, collective bargaining arrangements or historical contractual protections.

Where the factor places one sex at a particular disadvantage, the employer may also need to show that relying on it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

The Next decision confirms that a genuine need to attract and retain sufficient workers can justify higher pay. However, the employer must be able to show that those pressures actually existed. Simply referring to “market rates” will not necessarily be enough without evidence explaining why the higher rate was required.

What should employers do when there are differences in pay?

The Next decision is a useful reminder that employers should be able to explain how pay differences arose, why they continue to exist and whether they remain justified.

Review the full remuneration package

Employers should look beyond headline salary and compare basic pay, overtime, bonuses, allowances, shift premiums, paid breaks and other contractual benefits. A relatively small difference in one element of pay can become significant when applied across a large workforce over several years.

Identify and document the genuine reason for the difference

Where one group is paid more, the employer should be able to explain why. If the reason is recruitment difficulties, a skills shortage or market benchmarking, supporting evidence should be retained.

Useful evidence may include vacancy data, numbers of applicants, staff turnover, agency worker usage, competitor salary information and records showing that candidates were rejecting offers or employees were leaving because of pay. This was important in the Next case, where different recruitment and retention pressures in the warehouse workforce formed part of the justification for the higher pay.

Review pay differentials regularly

A difference that was justified when it was introduced may not remain justified indefinitely. For example, a premium introduced because of serious recruitment difficulties may require reconsideration if those difficulties later disappear.

Employers should therefore periodically review whether the original reason for a pay differential still applies, rather than allowing historic arrangements to continue automatically.

Consider gender patterns and equal pay reviews

Particular care should be taken where a lower-paid group is predominantly female and a higher-paid comparator group has a materially different gender profile. A statistical disparity does not automatically establish unlawful discrimination, but it may require the employer to objectively justify the relevant pay practice.

Employers may also wish to carry out an equal pay audit or job evaluation exercise to identify unexplained differences, assess whether roles may be comparable and address potential risks before they develop into formal disputes or litigation.

What should employees do if they believe they are being paid less?

Employees should first identify the precise difference.

Rather than simply asking whether another employee “earns more”, it is useful to establish:

what contractual term is different;
who the comparator is;
whether the comparator is of the opposite sex;
what work each person actually performs;
whether the jobs are the same, broadly similar or potentially of equal value; and
what explanation the employer gives for the difference.

Employees should retain payslips, contracts, job descriptions, bonus information, correspondence relating to pay and any information showing what work they and their comparator actually perform.

Where the roles are different, an equal value claim can become technically complex and may require expert evidence.

Can an employer simply say that it cannot afford to equalise pay?

The Next appeal also provides useful guidance on this point.

The relevant question is not simply whether the employer could afford to increase the pay of the lower-paid group.

The focus is on the reason why the comparator group receives the higher rate and whether reliance on that reason is legally justified.

In Next, the fact that the company might have been able to afford higher retail wages did not by itself defeat its defence. The relevant issue was whether there was a genuine business need to pay the higher warehouse rate.

This does not mean that cost is irrelevant in every equal pay case. Rather, affordability should not be confused with the underlying reason for the difference in treatment.

Does the Next decision mean that “market forces” will always justify different pay?

No. The decision does not create a general rule that market forces automatically justify paying one group more than another.

A bare assertion that one job “normally pays more” may itself reproduce historic inequalities in the labour market.

What mattered in Next was that there were specific recruitment and retention reasons for paying the warehouse employees more, supported by the factual findings in the case.

Employers relying on market forces should therefore be prepared to show what market pressure existed, how it affected the particular role and why the resulting difference in pay was reasonably necessary.

How can we help?

Our Litigation team advises both employers and employees on equal pay and workplace discrimination issues.

For employers, we can assist with reviewing salary and benefit structures, identifying potential equal pay risks, considering whether existing pay differentials can be justified, reviewing employment contracts and policies, and responding to grievances or Employment Tribunal claims.

For employees, we can advise on whether a difference in salary, bonus, overtime, allowances or other contractual benefits may amount to an equal pay issue, identify an appropriate comparator and advise on the evidence and procedure required to pursue a claim.

Obtaining advice at an early stage can often help identify whether there is a genuine legal issue and, where appropriate, allow the parties to address the position before a dispute develops into lengthy and expensive litigation.

Final thoughts

The lesson from the Next equal pay appeal decision is not that employers must always pay every employee performing work of equal value exactly the same amount.

Nor is it that an employer can simply refer to “market forces” and avoid the equal pay provisions.

The more useful lesson is this: where there is a difference in pay, employers should know why that difference exists and be able to prove it.

For employees, different job titles or different departments should not automatically prevent further enquiry. Equal pay law looks beyond labels and examines the real value and demands of the work being performed.

Clear pay structures, proper record keeping and regular review can prevent relatively ordinary salary differences from developing into major equal pay litigation.

Need legal advice? We’re here to help.

If you have questions about your situation or need advice on your next steps, our experienced legal team can help.

Call us on 020 7928 0276 between 9:30am and 6:00pm, or email [email protected].

You can also contact us online by completing our short enquiry form. Tell us a little about your situation and we’ll get back to you as soon as possible.

Not sure which service you need? Get in touch and we’ll help you identify the right team.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Hiding Assets in Divorce: What Happens When a Spouse is Dishonest About Money?

When a marriage ends, one spouse sometimes turns out to have far less on paper than the other expected. The business is worthless. The house belongs to someone else. There is barely anything to split.

Two Family Court decisions this year, MK v SK [2026] EWFC 28 and DR v ES [2026] EWFC 15, deal with exactly that scenario, and both involved husbands who said they had almost nothing when the surrounding evidence pointed the other way.

In each case, the court looked past the paperwork to work out who really held the money. And in each case, the husband came out of it worse than he would have done had he simply been open from the start.

Written by Yi Ling Lio, Private Client Paralegal

Do you have to disclose everything in a divorce?

Yes. Anyone in financial remedy proceedings owes the court a duty of full and frank disclosure. The court cannot divide finances fairly if it cannot see them properly in the first place.

Where disclosure is patchy or unreliable, the court can draw adverse inferences. Moher v Moher [2019] EWCA Civ 1482 confirms that a judge can work from the evidence that does exist, applying common sense and the probabilities of the case. Leaving gaps in the evidence does not mean the court has to ignore them.

The principle runs back to F v F [1994] 1 FLR 359. Where someone’s concealment makes the true position impossible to establish, the court would rather risk an outcome that disadvantages the person who withheld information than one that disadvantages the person who complied.

The problem tends not to stay contained. Once a judge decides a party has not been straight about one thing, everything else that party says becomes harder to believe. Credibility can matter as much as the assets themselves.

***MK v SK*: the husband who said he had almost nothing**

The parties had been married for around 19 years. The husband had sold an internet start-up for more than $10 million, then co-founded a technology group and ran it as chief executive for over two decades. During the marriage the family used homes in London, the English countryside, Toronto, New York, Singapore and the Caribbean, all paid for through the business. The judge estimated the lifestyle might have cost as much as $1 million a year.

The husband’s case was that he had virtually no personal wealth. His account was that he had worked 80-hour weeks for twenty years without salary or bonuses, lived off business expenses, and gradually drawn down a $10 million loan he had made to the company. His shares sat in an offshore trust he said he could not control, and the business was close to insolvency in any event.

Mr Justice Peel did not accept his account, and two fairly small pieces of evidence weighed heavily against him.

The first was a photograph the wife took of a whiteboard after they separated. It set out the structure of the business and the trust, with “UBO” (Ultimate Beneficial Owner) written above the husband’s name. The judge decided the husband had either written those words or directed that they be written, and took the diagram as an accurate picture of the real position.

The second was an email in which the husband referred to the trust’s protector as the administrator of “my family trust”. That was hard to square with his claim that the trust was nothing to do with him.

The trust structure did not put the assets out of reach either. The question was not who technically owned them but whether, in practice, they were available to him, following Whaley v Whaley [2011] EWCA Civ 617. In evidence the husband accepted the trustee would do whatever he asked, which largely ended the argument that the money was beyond his reach. The trustees made matters worse: they repeatedly gave the husband’s solicitors the same unhelpful reply, then ignored the formal letters of request the court sent.

The court did not simply adopt the wife’s figures, however. Mr Justice Peel accepted the business was in genuine difficulty and put the husband’s wealth in the low millions, well below what the wife had claimed. The court used the adverse findings to make sense of the evidence it did have, not as an excuse to speculate.

The wife retained the mortgage-free former matrimonial home, worth approximately £837,500, and received £525,000 to clear debts, many of them run up during the litigation, plus a further £1.55 million as capitalised income. The judge dealt with the husband’s needs briefly. He retained access to undisclosed wealth, and if the outcome was less favourable than he wanted, that was down to how he had presented his finances. By the end of the proceedings, the parties’ combined legal costs exceeded £850,000.

***DR v ES*: the husband whose assets belonged to his parents, or so he said**

DR v ES and others (Further LSPO Application) shows the same approach at an earlier stage, and what the court can do when one spouse is left unable to fund the litigation.

The parties married in 2008 and separated in early 2021. Much of the family’s wealth sat in two property companies. When the wife issued her financial remedy application, the husband disclosed in his Form E, for the first time, that he had never owned his share in one of the companies outright. He claimed he held it on trust for himself and his parents in equal shares, then sold his interest back to his parents for around £1.3 million, which on his account left them as the only beneficial owners.

That argument failed at a preliminary issue hearing. In DR v ES & Ors [2024] EWFC 176, Mr Justice Francis found that the husband owned the entire beneficial interest and that his parents had “closed ranks” with him to defeat or reduce the wife’s claims. The husband and his parents were ordered to pay the costs of the hearing, and permission to appeal was refused.

On the unchallenged expert evidence, the husband’s net assets came to around £18 million. The wife’s liabilities exceeded her assets.

That gap led to the January 2026 judgment. The wife applied for legal funding under section 22ZA of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, which lets the court order one party to help fund the other’s costs where that is needed for a fair hearing. Where the paying party has been unclear about their finances, the court will not treat that uncertainty as a reason to refuse funding. It can proceed on the basis that they are able to pay, so their incomplete disclosure counts against them rather than helping them.

The wife sought just over £726,000, her fourth funding application. The husband accepted she needed the money but said he could not raise it in time, mentioning only on the morning of the hearing that he intended to meet his bank.

Mr Justice MacDonald was not convinced. A man worth around £18 million had complied with every previous funding order, and there was no good reason he could not manage this one. The judge ordered him to pay £560,120, part of it covering costs the wife had already run up. Her solicitors could not be expected to carry on with large bills unpaid, especially when the husband was planning to use borrowed money to clear his own lawyers first.

The order came with strict safeguards. Payment was by instalments, applied in a prescribed order, and the husband was barred from paying his own solicitors ahead of, or more than, the wife’s. The point was equality of arms: one party should not litigate with fully funded representation while the other struggles to keep a legal team instructed. The husband was also warned that further obstruction by him or his parents could lead the court to revisit the funding arrangements.

By that stage the financial remedy proceedings alone had cost around £2 million, with another £1.5 million spent on litigation about the children and £800,000 incurred by the parents themselves. Mr Justice MacDonald described the litigation as financially devastating for the family.

What the two cases have in common

In MK v SK the husband relied on an offshore trust. In DR v ES he said the assets belonged to his parents. However, in neither case did the court take the legal structure at face value. It asked who actually controlled the assets and whether the explanation held together against the rest of the evidence. Where it did not, the uncertainty was resolved against the party who created it.

The damage is not confined to the figures. Once a judge doubts one part of a party’s evidence, the rest becomes harder to accept. And neither dispute was cheap. Between them the families spent several million pounds, much of it linked by the judges to the way the litigation had been run. Trying to hide or reduce wealth made both cases more expensive, not less.

What can I do if I think my spouse is hiding assets?

A large gap between the disclosed finances and the lifestyle enjoyed during the marriage is often the starting point. If the figures on paper could not have paid for the life you shared, the court will want that explained.

Gather what evidence you can. Records showing how household expenses were met, who provided financial support, and any documents referring to trusts, companies or informal family arrangements may all become relevant.

Complex structures should not put you off. Offshore trusts, corporate vehicles and family ownership arrangements do not by themselves defeat a financial claim. The court looks at practical reality as well as legal form, including who can access or control the assets.

A shortage of funds need not stop a case either. As DR v ES shows, the court can require one spouse to fund the other’s legal costs so that both can participate on an equal footing.

The court will not, however, speculate about hidden wealth without evidence, and genuine falls in asset values will be taken into account. The aim is not to punish anyone but to reach a fair outcome on the true financial position.

Key takeaways

Full and frank financial disclosure is a duty owed to the court. Where it is breached, the court can draw adverse inferences from the evidence that is available.
A substantial mismatch between the disclosed finances and the lifestyle enjoyed during the marriage will attract close scrutiny.
Trusts, companies and family ownership arrangements do not automatically place assets beyond the court’s reach. Access and control matter more than labels.
The court can order one spouse to fund the other’s legal costs where necessary for both parties to participate fairly.
Poor disclosure rarely works as a strategy. It increases costs, undermines credibility and invites conclusions that full disclosure might have avoided.

Need legal advice? We’re here to help.

If you have questions about your situation or need advice on your next steps, our experienced legal team can help.

Call us on 020 7928 0276 between 9:30am and 6:00pm, or email [email protected].

You can also contact us online by completing our short enquiry form. Tell us a little about your situation and we’ll get back to you as soon as possible.

Not sure which service you need? Get in touch and we’ll help you identify the right team.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Key Changes to the UK Immigration Rules from October 2026

On 3 September 2026, the Home Office published a new Statement of Changes to the Immigration Rules (HC 584), introducing a number of amendments across the UK immigration system. Most changes will take effect from 8 October 2026, with further changes coming into force in October, November and December.

The key developments include new protections for Skilled Workers who are victims of modern slavery, expanded provisions for victims of domestic abuse, changes to the EU Settlement Scheme and amendments supporting the UK’s return to the Erasmus+ programme.

Written by Angel Wan, Solicitor

Protection for Skilled Workers affected by modern slavery

From 8 October 2026, certain Skilled Workers recognised as victims of modern slavery will be permitted to work for any employer, including through self-employment or voluntary work.

This will apply where the worker has been referred to the National Referral Mechanism (nrm) and received a positive Conclusive Grounds decision during their current permission. Professional sportsperson and sports coach roles remain excluded.

The change aims to reduce the risk of immigration status being used by exploitative sponsors as a means of control. However, it does not itself provide a route to settlement, and affected individuals should consider their longer-term immigration position.

Expanded protection for victims of domestic abuse

The Appendix Victim of Domestic Abuse route is being extended to certain adult dependent children whose relationship with their parent or the parent’s partner has permanently broken down due to domestic abuse.

The change follows the Northern Ireland High Court judgment in JR337’s Application for Judicial Review [2026] NIKB 12 and provides an important additional protection for affected migrants.

Changes to the EU Settlement Scheme

The new Rules allow certain pre-settled status holders who no longer meet the usual eligibility requirements to retain their status where removing it would be disproportionate.

The Rules also reflect the Court of Appeal’s decision in Ayoola v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWCA Civ 1519, allowing certain children with pre-settled status to retain their status while completing their education in the UK, with corresponding provisions for their primary carers.

There are also changes to the deadline for certain joining family members and the way EUSS status is linked to new passports. The option to rely on an expired biometric residence permit as proof of identity will be removed from December 2026.

Fee waivers, variations and Family Returns

The Rules introduce important procedural changes concerning fee waivers and varied applications. Where an applicant submits a fee waiver request, the subsequent application must be for the same route. Applying under a different route may mean that the later application date applies for section 3C leave purposes.

Where an application is varied, the applicant must also complete biometric enrolment within the deadline applicable to the original application.

In addition, families within the Family Returns Process will be able to raise Article 8 family or private life claims without making a formal application, paying a fee or using a specified form.

Erasmus+ and other changes

The Immigration Rules are being amended to support the UK’s return to the Erasmus+ programme, allowing eligible participants to undertake activities including study placements, training, job shadowing and traineeships under the Visitor, Student, Child Student and Government Authorised Exchange routes.

The Hong Kong BN(O) route is also being amended so that eligible dependent children under 18 can qualify for settlement alongside a parent without completing the usual five-year residence period.

Other changes include extending the discretionary ground relating to applicants who have acted to frustrate immigration controls to in-country applications and increasing the Student route maintenance requirement from 30 November 2026.

Conclusion

The latest changes introduce both important protections and additional procedural requirements for migrants and sponsors. Given the frequency and complexity of changes to the Immigration Rules, it is important to establish which Rules apply to an individual’s circumstances and when.

Those affected should consider their immigration position carefully before making an application or taking action that could affect their status. Professional legal advice can help ensure that the correct route is pursued and that any available protections or opportunities are fully considered.

If you have any immigration-related enquiries, please contact us. We can assess your circumstances and advise on the most appropriate course of action.

Need legal advice? We’re here to help.

If you have questions about your situation or need advice on your next steps, our experienced legal team can help.

Call us on 020 7928 0276 between 9:30am and 6:00pm, or email [email protected].

You can also contact us online by completing our short enquiry form. Tell us a little about your situation and we’ll get back to you as soon as possible.

Not sure which service you need? Get in touch and we’ll help you identify the right team.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Taking a Child Abroad – Do You Need Permission From the Other Parent?

Taking children abroad for holidays, whether for leisure, to visit family, or as part of a school or educational programme, is a normal part of many families’ lives. However, after parents separate, many are unaware that the legal position surrounding overseas travel with children can change significantly.

Taking a child outside the UK without the necessary consent can have serious legal consequences. In most cases, the consent of everyone with parental responsibility is required. It is not enough for one parent to decide unilaterally simply because they are the child’s mother or father.

Written by Aurora Chan, Legal Assistant

In some circumstances, removing a child from the UK without the appropriate consent may amount to child abduction, even where there was no intention to permanently remove the child or cause harm.

If you are planning to travel abroad with your child after separation, it is important to understand your legal obligations before making any travel arrangements.

What is child abduction?

Under the Child Abduction Act 1984, it is generally a criminal offence for a person connected with a child to take or send a child under the age of 16 out of the United Kingdom without either:

the consent of everyone with parental responsibility; or
the permission of the court.

This applies regardless of whether the child is being taken abroad for a short holiday or with the intention of relocating permanently, but the latter is likely to incur more serious legal consequences.

Who has parental responsibility?

If the child’s biological parents were married when the child was born, then both parents will automatically have parental responsibility.

If the biological parents were not married, the mother automatically has parental responsibility. The father will usually have parental responsibility if he is registered on the child’s birth certificate. Different rules may apply in cases involving adoption, surrogacy or IVF.

Additionally, parental responsibility can also be granted to other individuals by order of the court. Other individuals may also gain parental responsibility, including adoptive parents, stepparents, guardians or special guardians, or the local authority, through various means or by order of the court.

Before bringing a child under 16 years old outside the UK, it is important to establish all the individuals who have parental responsibility, as consent must be obtained from everyone who holds it. If you are unsure, you should seek legal advice before travelling.

What is parental responsibility?

Under section 3 of the Children Act 1989, parental responsibility is defined as “all the rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child and their property.”

In practice, parental responsibility gives a person both the right and the duty to be involved in important decisions about a child’s life, including:

where the child lives;
education;
medical treatment;
the child’s name; and
whether the child can travel abroad.

What are the rules for taking a child out of the jurisdiction?

The rules on bringing a child outside of the UK depends on whether there is a Child Arrangements Order in place.

If there is no Child Arrangements Order, then consent must be obtained from everyone with parental responsibility on each occasion. If consent cannot be obtained, then the parent wishing to bring the child abroad can apply to the court for a Specific Issues Order for permission to travel.

If there is a Child Arrangements Order in place, the terms are likely to set out specific rules regarding overseas travel. Generally, a person who is named in a “lives with” order can take the child abroad for up to 28 days without permission from anyone else, unless the order provides otherwise.

Getting your child back

If your child has been wrongfully removed from the UK without your permission, the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“the Hague Convention”) may assist in securing their return.

The Hague Convention is an international treaty between participating countries designed to ensure that children who are wrongfully removed or retained across international borders are returned promptly to the country where they were habitually resident before the removal. The courts of that country can then determine any longer-term issues regarding the child’s care and living arrangements.

There are currently over 100 contracting countries to the Hague Convention.

Generally, contracting countries will seek to arrange the prompt return of a child where the requirements of the Convention are met. However, there are limited exceptions, like where there is a grave risk of harm of returning the child, or where the child is sufficient mature and objects to returning.

Preventing abduction

If you are concerned that someone may remove your child from the UK without your consent, it is important to seek urgent advice and take action as soon as possible.

If there is an immediate risk that your child is about to be taken abroad, you should contact the police without delay. In urgent cases, the police may be able to issue a Port Alert, which can notify relevant ports and airports and assist in preventing the child from leaving the UK.

If the situation is not immediately urgent, you may be able to apply to the Family Court for protective orders, including:

a Prohibited Steps Order to prevent the child from being removed from the UK; and/or
a Specific Issue Order requiring the child’s passport to be surrendered and held by a trusted person or organisation, such as solicitors

What is a Child Arrangements Order and how can it help?

It may also be helpful to have a Child Arrangements Order in place to provide clarity about the child’s living arrangements and each parent’s responsibilities. As a foundation, the Order will set out where the child lives and how they spend time or have contact with each parent.

It can also set out rules around practical arrangements relating to overseas or domestic travel, such as requiring the provision of the travel itinerary or details of the trip to the other parent in advance.

A Child Arrangements Order can also address other aspects of the child’s day-to-day living arrangements, such as:

responsibility for the child’s daily expenses;
how school holidays and special occasions are shared;
how important decisions about education, healthcare and other aspects of the child’s upbringing should be made; and
how disputes and communication between parents should be managed.

Having clear arrangements in place can reduce uncertainty and minimise the risk of conflict by ensuring that both parents understand their rights and responsibilities. If a person repeatedly breaches the order, this may amount to contempt of court and possibly lead to appropriate enforcement action.

Defences to abduction

If a child has been taken outside the UK without the appropriate consent, there are limited circumstances where a person may have a defence under the Child Abduction Act 1984. These include where:

They believed that the other person with parental responsibility had consented, or would have consented if they had known all the relevant circumstances;
They had taken all reasonable steps to communicate with the other person with parental responsibility but were unable to do so; or
The other person’s refusal to consent was unreasonable (not applicable where there is a Child Arrangements Order, Special Guardianship Order or Prohibited Steps Order in place).

Whether a defence applies will depend on the specific circumstances of the case. If you are concerned about a potential child abduction issue or have taken a child abroad without the necessary consent, you should seek legal advice.

What factors will the Court consider?

When making decisions involving a child, such as whether a child should be allowed to travel abroad (Specific Issue Order/Prohibited Steps Order), or where a child should live (Child Arrangements Order), the court’s paramount consideration will always be the child’s welfare.

Under the Children Act 1989, the Court will take into account the following factors, known as the welfare checklist:

the child’s wishes and feelings (taking into account their maturity and level of understanding);
the child’s physical, emotional and educational needs;
the likely effect on the child of any change in their circumstances;
the child’s age, sex, background and any other characteristics that the court considers relevant;
any harm which the child has suffered or is at risk of suffering;
how capable each parent, and any other person involved in the child’s care, is of meeting the child’s needs; and
the range of powers available to the court, including whether making an order such as a Prohibited Steps Order or Specific Issue Order would better safeguard the child’s welfare.

The Court’s decision in each case will be heavily dependent on the specific circumstances of that case, as the Court aims to make a decision that best protects that child’s interest. It is therefore best to seek tailored legal advice.

How can we help?

Issues involving children and international travel can be complex, especially where there are disagreements between the parents. Careful consideration of both the legal obligations and the child’s welfare is necessary.

Our Family Law team can help guide you through the process, including:

advise on overseas travel;
negotiating travel arrangements with the other parent;
consulting on putting arrangements in place for children; or
preparing applications for Child Arrangements Orders, Specific Issues Orders, or Prohibited Steps Order.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Mortgagee Protection Clause: What Is It and Why Does It Matter?

A mortgagee protection clause is an important provision in a lease. It is designed to safeguard the interests of a mortgagee (lender) if the tenant (borrower) breaches the covenants of the lease and the landlord seeks to forfeit the lease.

The absence of a mortgagee protection clause does not necessarily mean that a lease is invalid or that a property cannot be sold. However, it can raise concerns for a lender. Where a mortgagee protection clause is missing from a lease, the parties may need to consider whether a deed of variation or indemnity insurance is required.

This article explains what a mortgagee protection clause is, why it matters to mortgage lenders, and what options may be available where the clause is missing.

Written by Claire Leung, Solicitor

What is a mortgagee protection clause?

A mortgagee protection clause is to protect the mortgagee in cases where the landlord seeks to forfeit the lease.

The precise drafting varies but the clause typically requires the landlord to notify the mortgagee in writing before initiating forfeiture proceedings, regardless of the grounds for forfeiture. This notification allows the mortgagee a reasonable period to remedy the breach that has triggered the forfeiture, thereby preventing the lease from being terminated.

In some cases, the clause may also allow the mortgagee to obtain a new lease if they undertake to remedy the breach that led to the forfeiture.

What is the issue if there is no mortgagee protection clause?

The mortgagee protection clause is important because the lender’s security is normally the borrower’s leasehold interest.

A lease generally contains covenants which the tenant must comply with. If the tenant breaches those covenants, the landlord may, depending on the circumstances and the terms of the lease, have rights to take enforcement action. Without mortgagee protection, the lender may not have an express contractual right to receive notice of the breach or to remedy it before the landlord exercises its rights.

If the lease is forfeited or otherwise terminated, the value of that security could be seriously reduced or lost altogether. This creates a potential risk to the lender because the mortgage is secured against the leasehold interest. If that interest is lost, the lender’s security may also be compromised.

How can you rectify the issue if there is a lack of mortgagee protection clause?

If a lender identifies that an existing lease does not contain the required mortgagee protection clause, there are several possible ways of addressing the issue:

Deed of variation

The most obvious solution is usually to enter into a deed of variation to amend the lease and insert an appropriate mortgagee protection clause.

This has the advantage of providing the lender with the contractual protection it requires and, where necessary, ensuring that the amended lease is properly documented and registered.

However, obtaining a deed of variation can take time and cost and may involve the cooperation of the landlord and tenant. The registration of the deed of variation at the Land Registry also requires time.

Side letter or separate agreement

In some circumstances, the parties may consider a side letter dealing with the lender’s concerns. The side letter will be signed by the Landlord who agrees to give the lender a written notice of their intention to commence forfeiture proceedings. Whether this is acceptable will depend entirely on the lender’s requirements. Some lenders will accept alternative contractual protection, while others will insist that the protection appears expressly in the lease itself.

Indemnity insurance

Indemnity insurance may also be considered as a means of addressing the lender’s concerns if the parties want to avoid the time and expense of obtaining a deed of variation. The insurance is intended to provide financial protection against specified losses arising from the insured risk.

However, indemnity insurance is not automatically a substitute for a mortgagee protection clause. Whether indemnity insurance is an acceptable solution depends on the nature of the risk, the terms of the proposed policy and, crucially, whether the lender is prepared to accept it.

Why do some lenders not require a deed of variation to include the mortgagee protection clause?

Not every lender takes the same approach.

A lender may decide that a deed of variation is unnecessary because, after reviewing the lease and the wider transaction, it considers the risk acceptable. For example, the lender may take into account the amount of the ground rent and the service charge, whether the property involves shared ownership.

The lender may also consider that statutory provisions already give it sufficient practical protection. Paragraph 2.4 of Practice Direction 55 of the Civil Procedure Rules provides that if the claimant knows of any person (including a mortgagee) entitled to claim relief against forfeiture as underlessee under section 146(4) of the Law of Property Act 1925 (or in accordance with section 38 of the Senior Courts Act 1981, or section 138(9C) of the County Courts Act 1984), the particulars of claim in a possession claim must state the name and address of that person, and the claimant must file a copy of the particulars of claim for service on them. The mortgagee will eventually obtain notice of the issue and service of forfeiture proceedings despite lack of the mortgagee protection clause.

On the other hand, some lenders take a much stricter approach and require the mortgagee protection clause to be incorporated into the lease. The benefit of such a clause is advance notice before the case gets to the stage of having been issued; whereas CPR PD55A, para 2.4 merely mean that the mortgagee obtains notice of the issue and service of proceedings. Having the protection expressly included in the lease gives greater certainty as to the lender’s position.

The lender’s requirements may be driven by its own internal risk management, regulatory, valuation or securitisation requirements. Given the risk to a lender of the loss of security if a lease is forfeited, a lender may insist on its standard form of protection even where, from a purely commercial perspective, the risk appears relatively small.

Conclusion

A mortgagee protection clause is primarily intended to protect a lender’s security by ensuring that enforcement actions under a lease cannot adversely affect the lender without appropriate notice or an opportunity to protect its position.

The absence of such a clause does not automatically mean that a transaction cannot proceed. However, it may create an issue for a lender. There is no single solution in every case. The key point is that different lenders have different risk appetites and lending requirements.

Where the issue is identified during a transaction, it is therefore sensible to establish the lender’s requirements as early as possible. This can help avoid unnecessary delay and ensure that the appropriate solution is considered before completion.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

When Can Leaseholders Get a Building Manager Appointed? – Lonestar Properties Ltd v Lecacheur

Did you know that when the management of a residential building becomes the source of ongoing problems, the leaseholders of the building may be able to apply to the Tribunal for it to appoint a manager? However, is it always the case?

The recent case heard in the Upper Tribunal, Lonestar Properties Ltd v Lecacheur, highlights an important limitation on this kind of application.

Written by Yitong Guo, Solicitor

Background

This case concerned an application for the appointment of a manager under Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987.

The First-tier Tribunal (FTT), on the finding that the relationship between the parties had broken down and that both buildings must be managed together, made a management order covering two separate terrace buildings. The landlord appealed and argued that one of the buildings did not satisfy the statutory requirements for the Tribunal to appoint a manager.

The issue points to the statutory concept of “qualifying tenants” and whether the relevant premises satisfied the requirements under the 1987 Act.

Only a “qualifying tenant” – broadly, the holder of a long lease of a flat in the building – can apply for a manager to be appointed under section 21 of the 1987 Act. Whether someone qualifies, and which building their lease relates to, can determine whether an application succeeds at all.

The Upper Tribunal considered the facts and concluded that the FTT did have jurisdiction to appoint a manager covering more than one building, but it had not properly justified extending the management order to the other building. The two buildings were treated as separate for lease and management purposes. The landlord had different obligations in respect of each building.

Importantly, the Tribunal also rejected the idea that two separate buildings could simply be treated together to overcome the problem. The fact that one building might satisfy the statutory requirements did not automatically make another building eligible.

The Impact

The Upper Tribunal allowed the appeal. It is a useful reminder that the Tribunal’s powers are statutory. It cannot simply make a management order because it considers that doing so would be practical or desirable.

Before making an application like this, leaseholders as tenants, need to consider carefully: whether the property falls within the relevant legislation, who the qualifying tenants are, and how the relevant “premises” should be defined for the statutory purpose.

In practice, this means checking, for each building involved:

Whether the property falls within the relevant legislation
Who the qualifying tenants are
How the “premises” should be defined for the statutory purpose

And before asking the Tribunal to change who manages a building, it is important to establish that the Tribunal has the legal power to do so.

If you are a leaseholder worried about how your building is being managed, or a landlord facing an application to appoint a manager, getting legal advice early can help you understand your rights and decide what to do next.

Get in touch with our team today to discuss your situation and find out how we can help.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

How to Get a Divorce in England and Wales: A Complete Guide

The rules around divorce were simplified in 2022. You now no longer have to blame your husband or wife, nor prove that anyone did anything wrong. Instead, you simply need to confirm that the marriage has broken down for good, and the court takes you at your word.

That is what people mean by no-fault divorce.

This guide walks you through how it works: what you need to apply, how long it takes, and what it costs.

Written by Yi Ling Lio, Private Client Paralegal

Can you apply?

You can apply for a divorce in England and Wales if all of the following are true.

You have been married for at least one year.
Your relationship has irretrievably broken down.
You or your spouse is domiciled or habitually resident in England or Wales.

It does not matter where in the world you got married. As long as the marriage is legally valid in the country where it took place, the courts here will recognise it.

The six stages of divorce

If you and your spouse both cooperate, the process is fairly predictable. These are the stages you must go through.

1	Submit the application We prepare and file your divorce application with the court. You can apply on your own or jointly with your spouse.	Week 0
2	The court issues it and notifies your spouse The court sends a copy to your spouse, who confirms they have received it. This is called the acknowledgement of service.	Weeks 1 to 4
3	The 20-week reflection period A fixed 20-week wait begins. It runs from the date the application is issued, not from the acknowledgement, so it overlaps with the earlier stages. This would be the time to sort out finances and arrangements for any children before anything is finalised.	Weeks 4 to 24
4	Apply for the Conditional Order After the 20 weeks, we confirm to the court that you still wish to proceed and apply for the Conditional Order. The court reviews the application and, once satisfied, grants it. This is the court’s own decision that you are entitled to the divorce.	Around week 24
5	The six-week wait A further six-week period runs from the date the Conditional Order is granted. Only once it has passed can you apply for the Final Order.	6 weeks
6	Apply for and receive the Final Order We apply for the Final Order. The court usually grants it within a day or two, and this is the point at which your marriage legally ends.	Around week 30

How long does a divorce take?

Start to finish, a straightforward divorce usually takes around 10 to 12 months. The 20-week reflection period is fixed by law, so even the smoothest case cannot move faster than that. Court processing times, whether you apply jointly or alone, and how quickly your spouse responds can all shift the timeline.

The divorce only ends the marriage. Finances and arrangements for any children are separate matters, and they are where most of the negotiation happens. If those cannot be agreed, the case can stretch to two years.

What you will need to get started

Your marriage certificate	The original, or a certified copy. If it is not in English, it will need a certified translation.
Your details	Full legal name, current address and contact details.
Your spouse’s details	Full name and an address where they can be reached. This can be an email address if they agree to it.
If you married abroad	The marriage must be valid in the country where it took place. That is usually enough for the UK courts.
One year of marriage	You need to have been married for at least a year before you can apply.
A UK connection	You or your spouse must live here or treat England or Wales as your permanent home.

What if things are not straightforward?

Your spouse does not want to divorce

They cannot stop it. Under the no-fault system, a divorce can only be challenged in very specific situations, for example if the court does not have the authority to deal with it. Simply refusing to agree is not one of them. The court does need, however, proof your spouse knows the divorce is happening, which is why they are asked to acknowledge the application.

Your spouse ignores the application

If they will not respond, we can arrange for a professional process server to hand the papers to them in person. Once we have proof they were served, we ask the court to confirm service and let the divorce carry on. Our fee for this step is £600 plus VAT, and the process server charges separately.

You cannot find your spouse

A divorce is still possible, but the court will want to see that you made reasonable efforts to locate them. If you believe they are still in the UK, it is often worth instructing a private investigator before you apply. If they still cannot be found, the court can allow the papers to be served another way, or in some cases dispense with service altogether, so the divorce can still go ahead.

Your marriage certificate is missing

If you married in England or Wales, you can order a replacement online from the General Register Office. If you married abroad, you will need to contact the marriage registry in that country for a certified copy. In most cases the divorce cannot proceed without it.

What it costs

Our fee for an uncontested divorce is fixed. It assumes you both agree to the divorce, there is no dispute over children or property, and your spouse does not hold things up.

Our legal fee for an uncontested divorce	£750 + VAT
Court fee (paid to the court, in advance)	£628
Service where your spouse will not respond (our fee only; the process server charges separately)	£600 + VAT

These figures cover the divorce only. Any work on your finances or child arrangements is charged separately, and we will always talk that through with you first. If your marriage certificate is not in English, a certified translation will be needed and is an additional cost.

A few questions we hear often

Does it matter who applies first?

For the divorce itself, no. There is no advantage to being the applicant, and being the respondent does not put you at a disadvantage. You can also apply jointly if you are on good terms.

Do we have to go to court?

For most divorces, no. The whole process is handled online and on paper. You would usually only end up in front of a judge if there is a dispute over finances or children that cannot be resolved any other way.

Should I sort out the money before the Final Order?

Usually, yes. It is often wise to have a financial order in place before the marriage formally ends, because ending the marriage can affect certain rights, such as those tied to pensions. There is also what is sometimes called the remarriage trap. If you remarry before a financial order is in place, you can lose the right to make certain financial claims against your former spouse. We can advise you on the right timing for your situation.

Speak to us

If any of this raises questions about your situation, get in touch and we’ll talk it through before you decide what to do next.

You can also find out more about our family law service here.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Mediation Explained: What to Expect and How to Prepare

Imagine that you have been involved in a dispute for months. Letters have been exchanged. Each side believes they are right. Court proceedings may already have started. Then someone suggests mediation.

For many people, the immediate questions are practical ones. What actually happens at mediation? Do I have to compromise? Will I be sitting across a table from the other side all day? What happens if we cannot agree?

Mediation is much less formal than a court hearing, but it should not be treated casually. A successful mediation can bring a dispute to an end in a single day. Good preparation before that day can make a significant difference.

Written by Paul Cheuk, Solicitor

Do You Have to Try to Settle?

Mediation is a structured negotiation with the assistance of an independent mediator. The mediator is not a judge. They do not decide who is right or wrong and cannot normally impose a settlement on either party.

Going to mediation does not mean that you have to accept a settlement. You remain in control of whether an agreement is reached and on what terms.

Parties to civil proceedings are expected to engage seriously with ways of resolving disputes without a trial. However, there is therefore an important difference between being required to participate in the process and being required to settle. You may have to engage properly with mediation, but nobody can force you to accept an offer that you consider unacceptable.

Negotiation Starts Before the Mediation

The negotiation does not necessarily begin on the morning of the mediation. In many cases, the parties will already have exchanged settlement offers.

We usually suggest reviewing the case carefully before mediation and deciding what outcome would realistically be acceptable to you. This should include not only the amount in dispute, but also responsibility for the legal costs, possibility in delay of the court process, damage to commercial relationships, and the risk of enforcement.

We often observe that parties focus too heavily on one headline figure. In practice, payment dates, instalments, confidentiality, costs, or future business arrangements may be just as important.

You Still Need to Prove Your Position

Mediation is a negotiation rather than a trial, but that does not mean evidence and legal arguments become irrelevant.

If you are claiming £100,000 in damages, for example, the other side will want to know how you arrived at that figure. You may need to provide invoices, accounts, valuations, expert evidence, or calculations to demonstrate the loss. Simply saying that you believe your claim is worth £100,000 is unlikely to persuade the other side to pay it.

The same applies from the other direction. A defendant may say that they cannot afford to pay the settlement immediately and ask for instalments. The other side may reasonably ask for evidence of that financial position before agreeing to wait for payment.

We therefore suggest thinking carefully before mediation about what you may need to demonstrate, rather than simply what you intend to ask for. The evidence required for negotiation may well be different from the evidence required at trial. Sometimes a small number of carefully selected documents can make a significant difference to persuade the other side.

At the same time, disclosure should be considered carefully. Mediation does not mean that you should simply hand over every document available. What information should be provided, and when, can itself form part of the negotiation strategy.

What Happens on the Day?

The format can vary. Mediation may take place in person or remotely. In a typical mediation, each party has its own private room with its lawyers. The mediator moves between the parties and speaks to each side separately.

There may also be a joint meeting at the beginning where everyone comes together, although this is not necessary in every case.

The mediator will usually ask each party to explain its position. They may challenge assumptions and ask difficult questions. A good mediator may ask you to consider not only why you think you will win, but what happens if the judge disagrees with you.

What you tell the mediator privately will generally remain confidential unless you authorise the mediator to communicate it to the other side. This allows parties to discuss possible compromises more openly.

We usually find that clients are surprised by how much of the day is spent waiting while the mediator speaks to the other side. This is normal. Those periods are often useful for reassessing the case, considering the latest offer, and preparing the next response.

We also suggest using the mediator actively. A mediator can often help test how the other side may react to a proposal before a formal offer is made.

Who Pays for the Mediation?

The mediator charges a fee, which is commonly shared between the parties unless another arrangement is agreed. Each party will also usually pay its own lawyers for preparing for and attending the mediation.

This can still be considerably less expensive than taking a case through a full trial. The comparison should therefore not simply be between the settlement figure and what you believe your claim is worth.

We usually suggest looking at the total commercial picture. Future legal costs, management time, delay, the possibility of losing, and the risk of having difficulty enforcing a judgment all have a value. Sometimes accepting less today can make commercial sense when compared with spending considerably more to pursue an uncertain result later.

What Happens If You Reach an Agreement?

Once an agreement is reached, it is important to record the terms properly before everyone leaves.

The lawyers will usually prepare a written settlement agreement. If court proceedings have already begun, the parties may also need an appropriate court order to bring those proceedings to an end.

We often observe that the final drafting stage is where unexpected issues arise. Payment dates, tax, confidentiality, costs, releases, and what happens to the existing proceedings should all be considered carefully. If payment is to be made by instalments, the agreement should also address what happens if an instalment is missed.

Knowing When to End the Mediation

Not every mediation succeeds. Sometimes the parties remain too far apart.

There is no requirement to keep negotiating indefinitely. Sometimes it becomes clear that the parties are not going to reach an agreement that day.

However, we suggest being careful about leaving too quickly. Positions can change considerably during a mediation. An offer that appears unacceptable in the morning may look very different after the risks, evidence, costs, and practical alternatives have been explored properly.

Before ending the mediation, it is often worth asking whether there is another structure that has not yet been considered. The disagreement may be about when money is paid rather than how much is paid. It may be possible to agree instalments, security, staged performance, or another practical arrangement.

The decision to end the mediation should therefore be considered with your legal team. Sometimes walking away is the correct decision. The important thing is that it should be a considered decision rather than a reaction to a difficult point in the negotiation.

Final Thoughts

Mediation is not simply a meeting where everyone is asked to compromise. It is a structured negotiation in which preparation, evidence, timing, and strategy all matter.

The aim is not necessarily to prove that you are right. The question is whether an agreement can be reached that is better than the risks, costs, and uncertainty of continuing the dispute.

At Lisa’s Law, we assist clients before and during mediation. We assess the case, prepare the evidence and negotiation strategy, advise on offers during the mediation, and draft the final settlement terms if an agreement is reached. Proper preparation allows you to enter mediation knowing not only what you want, but also what you can demonstrate, what you can realistically achieve, and when it makes sense to settle.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

What Is Voluntary Return? A Solicitor’s Guide to Eligibility and Risks

We’ve recently received a number of enquiries about voluntary return.

In this article, we explain what voluntary return involves, who is eligible, and share our solicitor’s view on when it may – or may not – be the right option.

Written by Victor Falcon Mmegwa, Solicitor

Introduction

Voluntary return is a scheme that helps people return to their home country if they do not have permission to remain in the UK. The Voluntary Returns Service (VRS) can support this process in several ways:

Explain your options for returning home.
Help you get travel documents, such as a passport.
Pay for travel tickets, if you are unable to.

You may be able to apply for financial support of up to £3,000. You can use this support to find somewhere to live, find a job or start a business in your home country.

However, you may not be able to come back to the UK for a specific time period after you have left the UK. This is known as a ‘re-entry ban’.

How long the ban is depends on your immigration record and on how much support you had from the Home Office when you left.

Who can get help

You can apply for Voluntary return if any of the following applies to you:

You are in the UK illegally or have overstayed your visa or permission to stay
You have withdrawn, or want to withdraw, your application to stay in the UK
You have made a claim for asylum in the UK
You have a letter from the Home Office confirming you’re a victim of modern slavery but you do not have permission to stay

When you cannot apply

You cannot apply for a voluntary return if you:

Have permission to stay in the UK
Are currently being investigated by the police or detained by the Home Office
Have been given a prison sentence that’s 12 months or longer
Have been convicted of an offence and given a deportation order
Have humanitarian protection, indefinite leave to remain or refugee status in the UK
Have a Service Providers from Switzerland visa
Have a Frontier Worker permit
Have an S2 Healthcare Visitor visa
Have applied for, or have settled or pre-settled status under the EU settlement scheme

Who can get financial support

The voluntary returns service can provide up to £3,000 in financial support to help you after you leave the UK. If you are eligible, you will get a single payment on a card before you leave the UK. You can only use the card after you return to your home country.

You can apply for financial support if any of the following applies to you:

You are returning to a ‘developing country’, as defined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Your claim for asylum in the UK has been refused
You have a letter from the Home Office confirming you’re a victim of modern slavery but you do not have permission to stay
You’re part of a family group that will travel together, including children under 18 years old – this does not include any children who are British
You’re under 18 and travelling alone
You’re under 21 and a care leaver
You’re sleeping rough
You need more help with your return – for example, because you have a medical condition

However, you cannot get financial support if you are planning to buy or have bought your travel ticket.

How to apply

You can apply by completing an online application for voluntary return.

You will need:

Your address in the UK
An email address

Do not apply online if you’ve booked a flight to leave the UK in the next 7 days. You can call the voluntary returns service team instead.

You also do not need to apply if you are planning to buy or have bought your ticket, and you already have your travel and identity documents.

My thoughts

Voluntary return can be a sensible option, but it depends heavily on the person’s circumstances and what immigration status they may have in the future. Let’s take a look at when it can be a good option, as well as some advantages and disadvantages of voluntary return.

When voluntary return can be a good option

It may be appropriate where:

The person has no realistic immigration route to remain in the UK.
Their asylum/immigration appeal has been exhausted and there are no credible further legal challenges.
There are significant practical difficulties with remaining in the UK, such as prolonged uncertainty or detention.
The person genuinely wants to return and can do so safely.
Assisted return may provide financial or practical reintegration support, depending on eligibility.
The person wants to demonstrate that they are willing to comply with immigration requirements rather than remain unlawfully.

Advantages

Voluntary return is preferable to enforced removal from a compliance perspective. It can avoid the additional consequences and disruption associated with enforcement action and may allow the person to make their own arrangements for travel and return.

It can also be better from a case-management and practical perspective than simply disappearing or remaining in the UK without status.

Disadvantages

I would be particularly careful where the person:

Has a pending appeal or judicial review or application with the Home Office;
May have a legitimate basis for further leave;
Has a strong human-rights/family-life claim;
May be able to regularise their position through another immigration route;
A person would be at risk of persecution or serious harm if returned;
Has unresolved medical, safeguarding or family circumstances;
May want to return to the UK in the future.

A voluntary return can also have future immigration consequences, depending on the person’s immigration history, previous breaches, removal/departure arrangements and the route through which they later seek entry.

Should you require any assistance or advice on Voluntary return, then please do not hesitate to contact us.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Your 5 Year Commercial Lease Is Ending – Do You Really Have to Leave?

Signing a commercial lease? Think the rent should be your only focus? Think again.

For business owners, a commercial lease is one of the crucial commitments their business will make. Experienced owners are often confident in negotiating rent, rent review and lease length, though one important question is sometimes overlooked: what happens when the lease comes to an end? A five-year lease does not necessarily mean you have to leave after five years, equally, you may not have an automatic right to stay either.

The Court of Appeal recently heard a case involving such issue, more specifically, on the clarification of whether a business tenancy containing a tenant’s option to renew is protected under Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

The case

Park Cakes Limited was the tenant of two commercial properties owned by companies within the Caterpillar group. The leases were due to expire on 13 June 2027. Each lease contained an option for the tenant to renew.

Caterpillar Property Ltd and another as the landlords argued that, because the leases already included a renewal option, section 28 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 applied, meaning the tenant would lose the statutory protection under Part II of the Act.

The Court found for the Tenant and disagreed with the landlords.

The Court held that section 28 only applies where there is an enforceable agreement between both parties to grant a future tenancy. A tenant’s option to renew does not, by itself, create such an agreement because the landlord is not yet under a mutual obligation to grant the new lease until the option is properly exercised.

Commercial tenants can take some comfort on the Court’s ruling, that the option to renew did not remove the tenant’s protection under the 1954 Act. Notably there was no previous authority on this point.

The impact

The decision is important for business owners or commercial tenants: it confirms that having a renewal option in your lease does not automatically mean you have given up your statutory rights under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954.

In short, there is a distinction between these two: an option to renew – the tenant has the right to choose whether to renew; and an enforceable agreement for a future tenancy – both landlord and tenant need to be legally committed to the future tenancy.

As you can see, the exact wording and structure of a commercial lease do matter a lot. A seemingly small provision can affect a tenant’s rights when the lease comes to an end. It is therefore advisable to take proper legal advice before entering or renewing your commercial lease.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

News and Insights

What happened in the Next case?

What does “equal pay” mean?

When can an employer lawfully pay different rates?

What should employers do when there are differences in pay?

What should employees do if they believe they are being paid less?

Can an employer simply say that it cannot afford to equalise pay?

Does the Next decision mean that “market forces” will always justify different pay?

How can we help?

Final thoughts

Need legal advice? We’re here to help.

Do you have to disclose everything in a divorce?

MK v SK: the husband who said he had almost nothing

DR v ES: the husband whose assets belonged to his parents, or so he said

What the two cases have in common

What can I do if I think my spouse is hiding assets?

Key takeaways

Need legal advice? We’re here to help.

Protection for Skilled Workers affected by modern slavery

Expanded protection for victims of domestic abuse

Changes to the EU Settlement Scheme

Fee waivers, variations and Family Returns

Erasmus+ and other changes

Conclusion

Need legal advice? We’re here to help.

What is child abduction?

Who has parental responsibility?

What is parental responsibility?

What are the rules for taking a child out of the jurisdiction?

Getting your child back

Preventing abduction

What is a Child Arrangements Order and how can it help?

Defences to abduction

What factors will the Court consider?

How can we help?

Have questions? Get in touch today!

What is a mortgagee protection clause?

What is the issue if there is no mortgagee protection clause?

How can you rectify the issue if there is a lack of mortgagee protection clause?

Why do some lenders not require a deed of variation to include the mortgagee protection clause?

Conclusion

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Background

The Impact

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Can you apply?

The six stages of divorce

How long does a divorce take?

What you will need to get started

What if things are not straightforward?

Your spouse does not want to divorce

Your spouse ignores the application

You cannot find your spouse

Your marriage certificate is missing

What it costs

A few questions we hear often

Does it matter who applies first?

Do we have to go to court?

Should I sort out the money before the Final Order?

Speak to us

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Do You Have to Try to Settle?

Negotiation Starts Before the Mediation

You Still Need to Prove Your Position

What Happens on the Day?

Who Pays for the Mediation?

What Happens If You Reach an Agreement?

Knowing When to End the Mediation

Final Thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Introduction

Who can get help

When you cannot apply

Who can get financial support

How to apply

My thoughts

When voluntary return can be a good option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Have questions? Get in touch today!

***MK v SK*: the husband who said he had almost nothing**

***DR v ES*: the husband whose assets belonged to his parents, or so he said**