Newcomer Injunction Against “Persons Unknown” Over Infringing Protests

Protests are part and parcel of British political tradition. However, it is also a reality that they may result in nuisance and trespass for property owners. If you are the owner of a property in which a protest takes place, you do not know the identity of the protestors who are responsible for infringement of your rights. In such circumstances, the courts have recognised that in order for justice to be done it may be appropriate to allow a claimant to obtain an interim injunction against “persons unknown”. This type of injunction is known as the “newcomer injunction”.

There are two recent decisions, namely London City Airport Ltd v Persons Unknown [2024] EWHC 2557 and Heathrow Airport v Persons Unknown [2024] EWHC 2599, in which the court granted the injunctions against the persons unknown to restrain the protests.

In both cases, the environmental groups planned disruptive actions and campaigning against the airports. The claimants sought the injunctions to restrain the acts which constituted trespass and nuisance. The court satisfied that the requirements for such injunctive relief had been fulfilled and the newcomer injunctions were granted.

Principles deciding whether to grant a newcomer injunction

The legal principles governing newcomer injunction which were established in the decision Wolverhampton City Council v London Gypsies and Travellers [2024] 2 WLR 45 were affirmed in these two decisions. In deciding whether to grant a newcomer injunction, the court will consider the principles of justice and equity and in particular the following :-

That equity provides a remedy where the other remedies available under the law are inadequate to vindicate or protect the rights in issues;
The equity looks to the substance rather than to the form;
That equity takes an essentially flexible approach to the formulation of a remedy; and
That equity has not been constrained by hard rules or procedure in fashioning a remedy to suit new circumstances.

In both of the airport cases, there is overlap between these two judgments as to the issues considered.

London City Airport decision

In London City Airport decision, the court considered that :

There was an imminent and real risk of harm from the threatened airport protests that justified precautionary relief;
The claimant established the causes of action in trespass and nuisance;
The balance of convenience and risk of grave injury favoured the grant of the injunction relief;
The protests were planned on private land where the unknown persons had no right to protest; and
An injunction was necessary as the byelaws are insufficient to deter the past airport protests.

Heathrow Airport decision

In the Heathrow airport case, the court considered that :

There was an imminent and real risk of the threatened harm from the protests;
The protests would constitute private and public nuisance;
The protests would be considered as trespass;
The legal tests for granting newcomer injunction were satisfied; and
Byelaws were insufficient to deter the protests.

Protest is not uncommon in UK. If a protest infringes your rights, newcomer injunction may be an option. Contact our litigation team today for further information.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Do I Qualify for Stamp Duty Relief as a First Time Buyer?

Buying your first home can be one of the most important moments in a person’s life. While the process of buying your first home can be challenging and sometimes stressful, first-time buyers do enjoy the benefit of stamp duty relief. In this article, we look at the details of First-Time Buyers’ Relief for buying a residential property in England.

Stamp Duty is a tax paid if the property you are buying is over a certain price. It’s important to note that Stamp Duty is only paid on properties worth £250,000 or over, with the exception to this being first-time buyers, who currently have stamp duty relief up to the value of £425,000. For the vast majority of property buyers who do pay SDLT, the rate is 5% between £250,001 and £925,000. This means that for those who aren’t first time buyers, they would pay £7,500 on a property which costs £400,000.

What are the criteria to claim stamp duty relief?

There is a purchase of a major interest in a single dwelling. If a purchase consists of two or more dwellings, the relief is not applicable. Also, the purchase of a leasehold property where the term is less than 21 years is not a major interest for the purposes of the relief. Relief cannot be claimed where the purchase consists of or includes non-residential land.

The purchase price is no more than £625,000. If the property is worth more than £625,000, there is no First-Time Buyers’ Relief and the buyer will pay the SDLT at the standard rates. If you are purchasing a leasehold residential property, the value of any rent payable under a lease is not taken into account.

The buyer must be an individual. If a company is the buyer or one of the buyers, no relief is available. Moreover, if there are more than one buyer and one of the buyers is not first-time buyer, relief is not available either.

The buyer intends to occupy the property as his/her main residence. If there are more than one buyer, all the buyers must intend to occupy the property as their main residence. In order to determine whether the buyer intends the property to be his/her main residence, HMRC will consider all the facts and circumstances of the case.

The effective date of the transaction is on or after 23 September 2022 (for the current first-time buyer SDLT relief rate).

The purchase is not linked to any other land transactions, except for land that is or forms part of the gardens or grounds of the dwelling.

Am I counted as a first-time buyer?

The first-time buyer must not, either alone or with others, have previously owned or partly owned another residential property or mixed property which includes a major interest in a dwelling situated anywhere in the world.

If you inherited a property or are a beneficiary of a trust that owns a property, you will not be counted as a first-time buyer.

Nonetheless, the restriction does not apply where the interest acquired was the grant or assignment of a lease with less than 21 years to run.

Unlike considering whether the higher rates SDLT apply, HMRC will not consider whether the non-purchasing spouse / civil partner has previously owned a major interest in a dwelling. Even though your spouse / civil partner has previously owned a residential property, as long as (1) you are a first-time buyer, (2) your spouse / civil partner is not one of the buyers and (3) he/ she does not currently own any other property, you can still be eligible to the first-time buyer relief if all criteria are met.

How much is the SDLT for first time buyers?

If you are eligible to claim the relief, the first-time buyer SDLT rates are as follows:

The above SDLT rates will only be in place until 31 March 2025. The government announced that any transaction which completes thereafter will be subject to the increased rates of SDLT. Taking into account of the fact that an average residential property transaction takes between 12 to 16 weeks (but can be even longer in certain circumstances), if you plan to purchase your first home recently, you are advised to realise your plan sooner rather than later.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Law Student Fails in Council Tax Exemption Dispute

A student found himself in hot water after applying for an council tax exemption for a property he was living at in Bath.

The case offers lessons around whether students are liable for council tax based on the status of the property and whether it is also their main residence. The lack of evidence for the property being the student’s main residence ultimately meant that the student failed in his attempt to be exempt from council tax.

The case

The subject of this case is a High Court appeal by Mr Marshall (“the Appellant”) against a decision made by the Valuation Tribunal for England (“the Tribunal”) of the local council (“the Respondent”). The appellant contested the decision of the Respondent which determined that the property was liable for council tax and did not qualify for a statutory exemption based on his student status. After the Tribunal dismissed his appeal under the Local Government Finance Act 1992, he subsequently appealed under the 2009 Regulations.

The Issue and the Law

The Appellant, along with his siblings and father, Mr Marshall KC, is a long leaseholder of a property located at a property in Bath, which they acquired in February 2022. During the Appellant’s studies at BPP University Law School from September 2022 to June 2023, he resided with his parents in London.

The dispute arose from a Council Tax Bill dated in December 2022, which charged £818.21 for the period from November 2022 to March 2023, with instalments due in January, February, and March. In February 2023, the Appellant submitted a request for a Class K exemption, claiming full-time student status and seeking reimbursement for payments made. The Council requested proof of residence, including utility bills and a student certificate.

The Appellant provided a Certificate of Student Status and other documentation but refused to supply additional evidence, stating that his parents covered the utilities. The Respondent continued to request further documentation to verify the Appellant’s residency.

The Respondent rejected the exemption claim, citing that the leaseholders were liable for the Council Tax and that the Appellant had not provided sufficient evidence to support his claim of residency or that the other owners were full-time students. The application for the Class K exemption was ultimately denied due to failure to meet the necessary criteria.

Tribunal appeal

The Appellant appealed to the Tribunal who gave its decision on April 2024, addressed an appeal regarding the respondent’s determination that the Appellant was not entitled to Class K or Class N exemptions for the disputed period. The Tribunal examined evidence presented by both parties, including statements, utility bills, and a student certificate. The main issue was whether the Appellant occupied the property as his main residence during the disputed period.

The Tribunal noted that while the Appellant was a joint owner and a student, there was insufficient evidence to prove that the property was his main residence. The evidence provided, such as utility bills and a student certificate, did not support the claim of main residence, as the Appellant primarily resided in London during the week and only stayed at the property on weekends. Therefore the Tribunal found that the scant evidence did not meet the burden of proof required to establish the property as the Appellant’s sole or main residence.

The Conclusion

The High Court Judge considered the facts in accordance with the legislative framework for council tax. The central issue for the application is the “sole or main residence” test for Class N exemption from council tax. The Appellant contends that this test should not apply to his case, which is based on his status as a student residing at the property during the Occupation Period.

The Appellant’s arguments included claims that the Tribunal misinterpreted evidence and failed to consider all witness statements. However, the Tribunal’s decision was upheld, as it was determined that the Appellant’s presence at the property did not constitute main residence, given the evidence of his living arrangements and the nature of his occupancy.

The appeal was ultimately dismissed, with the Tribunal’s conclusions regarding the definition of “resident” and the assessment of main residence being deemed appropriate and legally sound. The Tribunal’s findings were based on a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence, and the Appellant’s claims were found to lack sufficient merit to overturn the original decision.

The judgment was handed out on 11 October 2024.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

What compensation can you get if your property transaction is completed late?

There are many reasons why a property transaction might not be completed by the agreed time. This can cause great frustration and anxiety for all parties and may also have unintended consequences.

There are many reasons why a property transaction may be completed late. This includes the following reasons:

The property is not vacated on time by the seller.
The buyer’s funds are not in place.
Banks may not process the transfer of the funds in time.
Alternatively, a party’s IT system may be attacked by hackers.

How is the compensation calculated?

Whenever a transaction is completed late, the issue of compensation is likely to arise. The innocent party (in this article, the party whose fault is less, as contrary to the defaulting party) can consider making claims under the standard conditions of sale (unless they are expressly excluded or amended) and/or common law.

Under clause 7.2 of the standard conditions, compensation is calculated at the contract rate on an amount equal to the purchase price (less any deposit paid in case of a defaulting buyer) for the period by which the defaulting party’s fault exceeds that of the innocent party. In most cases, it will be the days between the actual completion date and agreed completion date.

If parties have contracted to complete a purchase of £680,000 at 2pm on a Friday (with 10% deposit being paid), but the buyer is unable to transfer the completion funds to the seller’s solicitors’ bank account until 3:30pm, the seller is entitled to treat the completion as having not taking place until the following working day Monday. The completion is treated as being delayed for three days.

If the Law Society’s interest rate is 9%, the compensation will be calculated as follows: (£680000-£68000 (deposit paid)) x9%, which is £55,080 a year and £150.90 a day. The seller will be entitled to a compensation of £452.70.

Clearly a claim under the standard condition is for a fixed amount, based on purchase price, rather than on the actual losses the innocent party has suffered. He/she/it does not need to produce evidence to prove such losses at all. Furthermore, there is no duty on the innocent party to take steps to mitigate own losses.

Is the compensation a penalty?

This may apparently make the whole process of claim simpler; however, could it potentially lead to another question: can the compensation be regarded as a penalty and hence invalidate the contract?

Of course, in most cases like the above one, it might not be, as the compensation amount may not be large. However, if the purchase price increases to £6,800,000, rather than £680,000, the daily compensation will increase to £1509.00. If the buyer transfers the completion funds to the seller at 2:10 and is only 10 minutes late, what will happen? The seller is still entitled to the same amount of compensation after having suffered virtually no losses and inconvenience. Is it not a penalty? It appears that in some cases, the answer to this question may not be as a clear cut one as we have thought.

In addition to the above fixed sum claim, the innocent party may also be able to make a claim under the common law for breach of contract. To support such a claim, the claimant needs to produce evidence of losses and evidence that he (also includes she/it/they in this article) has taken reasonable steps to mitigate the relevant losses. If parties cannot negotiate a figure, the case may have to be resolved by litigation.

Our thoughts

It should be noted that any common law claim will eventually be reduced by compensation awarded under the standard conditions stated above. This is to prevent double claim for some of the same losses the innocent party may have suffered, which makes perfect sense.

In reality, this gives the innocent party a choice for how to proceed with his claim. If he has suffered less than the fixed sum, he will clearly want to claim under the standard conditions, as it is simple; otherwise, a claim under the common law may make more sense.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

The new Employment Rights Bill – what do employers need to know?

On October 10, 2024, the government announced the introduction of the Employment Rights Bill 2024, a landmark piece of legislation aimed at enhancing worker rights and implementing new policies. This initiative aligns with commitments made by the Labour government in its ‘New Deal for Working People’ and its 2024 Manifesto.

The Bill seeks to strengthen various existing rights while also introducing important reforms. Key areas of focus include zero-hour contracts, fire-and-rehire practices, the qualifying period for unfair dismissal, sick pay, parental leave, probationary periods, flexible working arrangements, protections for new mothers, industrial action, and trade union recognition.

The Employment Rights Bill encompasses a wide range of the reforms outlined in the Labour Party’s New Deal. Alongside the Bill, the government has also published a policy document titled “Next Steps to Make Work Pay,” which provides an overview of the government’s plans and the next steps for implementing many of these measures.

It is important to note that the majority of the reforms will not take effect before 2026. Furthermore, the touted “right to disconnect/switch off” does not form part of the bill. Instead, it is included in the government’s Next Steps paper about reforms that it intends to implement in the future. We will do our best to keep you updated with the latest developments regarding the bill during its journey to become law.

A summary of the current state of worker rights, the promised changes, and the expected reform within the Bill is provided below.

Zero-hour contracts

Zero-hour contracts are employment agreements that do not guarantee a minimum number of working hours, leaving the employee without a required commitment to work. As a result, an individual’s work hours can be unpredictable and may fluctuate significantly from week to week. While those on zero-hour contracts do enjoy certain statutory protections, these are dependent on their employment status.

To enhance security for individuals in zero-hour roles, the Labour Party has committed to several key changes:

Prohibiting exploitative zero-hour contracts
Establishing a right to a contract that reflects the number of hours regularly worked, based on a 12-week reference period.
Ensuring that workers receive reasonable notice for any shift or schedule changes, along with proportional compensation for cancelled or shortened shifts.
Introducing measures to prevent employers from circumventing these protections
Ending one-sided flexibility by guaranteeing a baseline level of security and predictability in all jobs

The Bill will grant workers the right to guaranteed hours if they consistently work more than those hours. These guaranteed hours will be calculated based on a 12-week reference period. Employers will be obligated to offer guaranteed hours to workers at the start of their employment and at the conclusion of each reference period. Additionally, workers will have the right to bring claims to an employment tribunal if their employer fails to fulfil the obligation to provide guaranteed hours or if the offer does not meet the required standards.

Flexible working

Under the Employment Rights Act 1996, employees have a statutory right to request specific changes to their employment contracts, but they must have at least 26 weeks of continuous service to qualify. Recent legislative updates effective from April 6, 2024, made this right available from day one of employment. However, employers still have broad grounds to reject requests.

The new Bill will introduce a reasonableness standard for employers when denying flexible working requests. Additionally, employers will be required to provide a clear explanation to employees for their decision to refuse the request.

Protection for new mothers

Currently, dismissal due to pregnancy or maternity is classified as automatically unfair. This means that employees in such situations do not need the usual two years of continuous employment to file a claim with an employment tribunal. Women taking ordinary maternity leave are also entitled to return to their “same job” at the end of their leave, unless that position is no longer available.

The Labour Party’s Plan to Make Work Pay includes a commitment to enhance these protections further. It proposes making it unlawful to dismiss a woman for up to six months after she returns to work, except in specific circumstances.

Paternity leave

Employees are currently entitled to take paternity leave to support a mother or adopter in caring for a new child, but they must have at least 26 weeks of qualifying employment to be eligible.

The new Bill will establish paternity leave as a ‘day one’ right, allowing all eligible employees to access it immediately upon starting their job.

Fire and rehire

Employers currently have the option to terminate an employment contract (with appropriate notice) and offer immediate re-engagement on new terms. The Conservative Party previously introduced a statutory Code of Practice regarding dismissal and re-engagement, emphasising meaningful consultation and alternative solutions. However, the Labour Party has pledged to eliminate “fire and rehire” practices altogether and to reform the existing Code to provide stronger protections against misuse.

Under the new legislation, a clause in the Bill will amend the Employment Rights Act 1996. It will render a dismissal unfair if it occurs because an employee refused a contract change or if the employer attempts to rehire someone under altered terms for substantially similar duties. This provision will not apply if the employer can demonstrate that the contract variation was necessary to address significant financial difficulties affecting the business, and that avoiding such changes was not reasonably possible.

Unfair Dismissal Qualifying Period

Currently, under section 108(6) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the right to claim unfair dismissal typically requires at least two years of continuous employment, though there are exceptions.

The Labour Party has committed to abolishing this two-year qualifying period, making the right to claim unfair dismissal effective from day one of employment. The Bill will repeal the relevant section of the Act, removing the two-year requirement. However, there will be a new ‘initial period of employment’ or ‘probationary period’ during which employers can dismiss employees for specified reasons, provided they follow a defined procedure. The length of this initial period and the procedural details will be determined through consultation.

Sick Pay

Currently, Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) is available to employees who are too ill to work for at least four consecutive days and earn above a weekly threshold of £123.

The Labour Manifesto pledged to eliminate the qualifying period for SSP, making it a ‘day one’ right, and to remove the lower earnings limit.

The Bill incorporates these commitments in clauses 8 and 9. The government will also consult on the percentage replacement rate for those earning below the current SSP flat rate before implementing it as an amendment to the Bill. Additionally, the new Fair Work Agency will oversee the enforcement of SSP.

Parental leave

Parents, whether biological or adoptive, currently have the right to take up to 18 weeks of unpaid leave to care for their child until the child turns 18. However, this right is only available to those who have worked for their employer for at least one year.

The new Bill will establish parental leave as a ‘day one’ right, allowing all eligible parents to access it immediately upon employment.

Bereavement leave

Employees currently have the right to take Parental Bereavement Leave (PBL) following the death of a child, provided they meet specific parental relationship criteria and notice requirements. While PBL is a ‘day one’ right, it is currently limited to employees.

The new Bill will expand this right to include any “bereaved person,” allowing leave for the death of any individual, as long as they fulfil the relevant conditions outlined in the regulations.

The Bill also establishes a new single enforcement body known as the Fair Work Agency. They will be responsible for minimum wage and statutory sick pay enforcement, the employment tribunal penalty scheme, labour exploitation and modern slavery and enforcement of holiday pay policy.

Our thoughts

In summary, the introduction of the Employment Rights Bill 2024 marks a significant advancement in worker rights, aligning with the Labour Party’s commitment to improving working conditions. The proposed changes—such as the regulation of zero-hour contracts, the elimination of fire-and-rehire practices, and the introduction of ‘day one’ rights for sick pay and parental leave—aim to provide greater security and fairness for all employees.

The Bill’s enhancements to protections for new mothers, flexible working rights, and the reduction of the qualifying period for unfair dismissal reflect a progressive shift toward a more equitable workplace.

It is a good idea for employers to pay attention to the new changes. A principal reason for this is that, for employers who plan to sponsor overseas employees in the future, these will form part of their responsibilities.

While these reforms will not be introduced straight away, overall, these reforms are a positive step forward, fostering a more supportive and just environment for workers across the country.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Selling counterfeit goods on a UK e-commerce platform – can the platform withhold the payment?

Recently, several clients who sold counterfeit goods on a UK e-commerce platform have approached us after their payments were frozen indefinitely. The platform has withheld these funds pending proof from the merchants that the goods are authentic.

But why is this, and what can sellers do to remedy the situation? Find out here.

According to the Seller Terms, the platform has the right to withhold payments if it reasonably suspects a breach of the terms. However, the clause doesn’t specify how long the platform can withhold these funds, resulting in situations where sellers can’t prove authenticity, and the platform refuses to release the payments.

At first glance, this clause appears to give the platform broad authority to withhold payments in the event of any breach of the agreement. The issue is the broadness of the clause; read literally, it could allow the platform to withhold payments even for minor breaches. As the contract was made under the platform’s standard terms, the clause is subject to the “reasonableness” requirement under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.

This means that if the platform relies on this clause to alter its contractual obligations substantially, it must be fair and reasonable to do so. Therefore, there are valid grounds to argue that this clause could be unenforceable.

However, under English law, courts will not permit a claim if it would result in the claimant benefiting from illegal activity. If the court determines that the goods in question are counterfeit, it would not order the platform to refund the seller, as this would conflict with the principle that one cannot profit from unlawful conduct.

Our advice

Given the UK’s strict laws against selling counterfeit goods, we advise our clients to verify the authenticity of products and their supply chain when selling in the UK to avoid future disputes.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

Lisa’s Law Earns Prestigious Legal 500 ranking

As a business with long-held aspirations to be one of the sought-after law firms in the UK, Lisa’s Law Solicitors recently became one step closer to that goal. Last week, we were delighted to receive the news that we have achieved a Tier 4 ranking from Legal 500 for the “Immigration: personal” category, putting us among a select group of top law firms nationwide.

In addition to our Legal 500 ranking, we also received the accolade for client satisfaction. This is awarded by the Legal 500 to law firms with exceptionally high scores for client service and client experience based on their client survey. It is particularly special to be recognised for our dedication to client satisfaction. With over 1000 reviews on Google and an average rating of 4.9, this has always been at the very heart of what we do here. We would like to thank our clients for being integral to our success.

Whilst we are well known for our Immigration Law practise area, we are equally experienced in Wills and Probate, Residential and Commercial Conveyancing, Family Law, Litigation, and Business Law. After receiving our ranking for personal immigration, we are now aiming to achieve rankings in all the other areas in which we practise law, with professional teams dedicated to each.

Since 1987, the Legal 500 has been regarded as the pinnacle for law firm rankings. According to the Legal 500, their research is “based on feedback from 300,000 clients worldwide, submissions from law firms and interviews with leading private practice lawyers, and a team of researchers who have unrivalled experience in the legal market.”

You can view our Legal 500 profile here to learn more.

Chuanli Ding, Managing Director, commented on the achievement:

“I feel very proud of our immigration team. They have always worked very hard and are a team of caring and considerate professionals. I would like to congratulate them on the great achievement they have made. The ranking is clear recognition of the quality service and client care they have provided to our clients.

I also strongly believe that we provide equally high-quality service in all other areas of our practice. We will seek to be ranked and gradually recognised for these other areas in the near future.”

Director and Immigration Supervisor, Mahfuz Ahmed added:

I am immensely proud of our immigration team for their hard work and commitment, which has led to our successful entry into the Legal 500 rankings. This accomplishment is a testament to the dedication and professionalism of our team, who consistently prioritise client care and excellence in service. Moving forward, we are committed to ensuring that we maintain and build upon our high standard of practice in immigration law.

Some of the testimonials collected by the Legal 500 research team about our service include the following:

‘The team was professional and non-judgmental. They were reachable which is key and always kept me up-to-date with my case.’
‘This practice stands out for its unparalleled dedication to personalised client care and innovative solutions. What sets them apart is their relentless commitment to understanding the unique needs of each client and tailoring their approach accordingly.’
‘Victor Falcon Mmegwa is the best solicitor I have had in my 12 years of dealing with legal issues. His patience, his understanding, always willing to help out, his advice is always the best, and most of all he’s a good listener.’
‘Lisa’s law was fantastic. They really were there to help from start to finish. They explained everything to me in the beginning and gave me their advice on merits and chances of success.’
‘Their responses were incredibly swift and clear, which made a world of difference for me.’

Require our services? Get in touch with us today.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

What Does it Mean to be the Guarantor of a Lease?

In the context of a lease, guarantors play a crucial role in ensuring lease obligations are being exercised and fulfilled when the tenant fails to meet the lease requirements. This form of extra security can be commonly found in many leases. Before putting down your signature as a lease guarantor, there are things you need to consider.

By Katherine Sun

Who can become a Guarantor?

Any individual or company can be a guarantor for a commercial lease. Before accepting a corporate entity as a guarantor, the landlord will normally check on its trading history and ask it to provide its bank statements, evidence of assets and trading references to assess its suitability. Landlords normally do not like companies which are newly incorporated or have no assets, as a company’s liabilities are normally limited. Once the company is dissolved, landlords will lose their security.

If you are an individual acting as a guarantor, you will take on personal liability for the obligations under the lease. Unlike the limited liability that a company has, you will be personally liable if the tenant defaults. It is important to note that your personal assets may be at risk. Of course, landlords will also carry out credit checks on you to find out whether you have any properties and your credit rating, which is the same with corporate guarantors.

What can happen to a Guarantor?

Generally, a guarantor is required to step in whenever a tenant defaults in their obligations under a lease. It could be failure to pay rent, to repair or to do (or not to do) something else. In practice, a landlord will normally seek enforcement against the tenant first. When failed, they will take action against the guarantor.

Depending on how a lease is drafted, it is not necessary for the landlord to serve a formal notice to the guarantor to continue fulfilling the lease obligations such as rent arrears or a repair covenant. Once the concern is raised with the guarantor, the liabilities are accrued. In the event that the landlord forfeits the lease due to a tenant default (or the tenant simply abandons the lease and vanishes, the landlord will typically require the guarantor to take on a new lease or make a payment to the landlord to satisfy the liabilities within the lease. If the guarantor also fails, the landlord could start legal actions against both tenant and guarantor.

How long will a Guarantor’s liabilities last?

Unless stated otherwise, a guarantor’s liabilities normally last as long as those of the tenant’s for whom it guarantees, which is normally until the lease comes to an end, is surrendered or the tenant is released from its liabilities by the landlord following assignment of the lease to someone else or in any other ways.

A guarantor can also be replaced with another guarantor, provided that the landlord agrees to it.

Understanding the meaning and potential liabilities of guarantors in leases is crucial for all parties in commercial conveyancing. It is vital to identify the risks and complications before you agree to become an individual guarantor.

If you have any query on this issue, please do contact our commercial conveyancing solicitors to find out more about the process and your business’ needs. We provide comprehensive advice that suits your objectives and aims.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

New Report Released about the UK Labour Migration System after the End of Free Movement

In September 2024, Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX) published a report on the UK labour migration system following the end of free movement. The report focuses on industry perspectives from sectors that have historically relied on migrant labour like hospitality, care, and agriculture.

Challenges brought by the end of free movement

The report highlights several challenges for both employers and workers in these sectors following the end of free movement in the UK. Employers now face high costs and administrative hurdles when hiring migrant workers through visa sponsorship, making it more difficult to recruit both from overseas and within the UK. Workers also struggle with high visa fees, adding pressure on both sides.

The report also notes difficulties in attracting domestic workers, particularly when it comes to live-in care and agriculture, where jobs can sometimes be viewed as undesirable. As a result, many roles are filled by migrant workers, largely due to wage differences and strict visa rules.

Since the end of free movement, wages have risen, but this is primarily due to increases in the national living wage. Shift patterns have also changed: hospitality has improved conditions to attract local workers, but the care sector has seen worsened conditions due to staff shortages. Recruitment agencies are commonly used, though it’s unclear if their role has expanded. However, outsourcing recruitment may also increase the risk of worker exploitation.

Sector-specific concerns

Additionally, the report highlights sector-specific concerns regarding the long-term sustainability of industries and service quality:

In adult social care, there are growing issues with the quality of care due to reduced time for care visits, with some visits now lasting only 15 minutes. This leaves both workers overstretched and care users receiving inadequate support.
In agriculture, there are fears over the future of UK fruit farming. Shrinking access to EU workers and a reluctance to use recruitment agencies or the Seasonal Worker Visa have led some growers to consider switching from fruit farming to less labour-intensive crops like cereals.
For the hospitality industry, the main use of the Skilled Worker Visa is for hiring chefs. However, the increase in the minimum income requirement in April 2024 casts doubt on whether this pathway will remain viable.

Overall, the report concludes that visa route changes since the end of free movement have caused risks and challenges for both workers and employers.

What solutions does the report offer?

FLEX recommended that the Home Office should set visa fees based on administrative costs to ensure fairness for workers and employers. It also calls for the creation of a Single Enforcement Body (SEB) to protect workers’ rights and ensure fair pay. It suggests reallocating resources from immigration crime inspections to ensuring sponsors provide fair work. Visa policies should allow job mobility and lead to settlement, and repayment clauses for recruitment costs should be banned. The government should also focus on improving wages and training rather than relying on discounted labour schemes.

Additionally, FLEX advocates expanding visa options, repealing the No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) policy to reduce poverty, and abolishing the Illegal Working Offence to enable safe reporting of exploitation.

Our thoughts

We are pleased to see that the report identifies key issues in the UK immigrant employment market and offers valuable suggestions for government action. We hope the UK government will improve its policies to better protect the rights and interests of both UK employers and migrant workers.

Should you wish to know more about the latest knew regarding skilled worker visas in the UK, please do not hesitate to contact Lisa’s Law and our experienced solicitors will be happy to assist you.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

No More BRPs issued from October 2024, With BRP Replacement Service Also Discontinued

On September 26, 2024, the Home Office updated its guidance documents, marking the end of the Biometric Residence Permit (BRP) replacement service. In addition to this, the beginning of October marked the end of BRPs being issued. This move is part of a broader shift towards a fully digital immigration system from 1^st January 2025. The decision came without a formal announcement, but details were sent to stakeholders on the same day. Keep reading to learn more about the end of the BRP replacement service.

Who will the closure of the BRP replacement affect?

The closure of the BRP replacement will affect the following cohorts:

Non-EEA national family members of EEA nationals whose Biometric Residence Card (BRC) has expired
People whose BRP or BRC has been lost or stolen
People whose relevant personal details on their BRP or BRC have changed (such as name, gender, nationality, or facial appearance changes significantly)

Still necessary to report lost or stolen BRPs

While BRC holders already have access to a UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) account, BRP holders are now required to create one to obtain their digital eVisa. To do this, they can use their passport and the reference number from their most recent visa application. However, it’s still necessary to report any lost or stolen BRPs.

The Home Office also notified stakeholders that after October 31, 2024, no new BRPs will be issued, which explains the closure of the BRP replacement service. This has not been officially announced on the government website yet. However, Home Office guidance still advises people with indefinite leave in a passport to apply for a BRP through a No Time Limit (NTL) application, which seems contradictory to the closure of BRP replacement service.

How will individuals be able to return to the UK

A key concern is how affected individuals, particularly non-visa nationals, will travel and return to the UK until the end of 2024, when current guidance still instructs people to carry their BRP or BRC until the end of the year. It is likely because the integrates passenger information system with airlines is not yet fully operational.

The Home Office remains confident that its digital solutions will be effective. It has also set up alternative measures to confirm immigration status, “if for any reason the automated response is not provided–including a 24/7 carrier support hub.’’

Why are the Home Office no longer issuing BRPs?

BRPs are set to be replaced by a fully digital immigration system in the form of eVisas. We previously covered what an eVisa is and how you can register for one in an earlier article here.

You can also view our video explainer demonstrating how to register for an eVisa on the Home Office website here.

Our thoughts

In summary, the UK is transitioning to a fully digital immigration status system, and these changes mark the beginning of the end for physical BRPs. While the shift may cause some temporary confusion, the Home Office has set up systems to ensure a smooth transition. As the digital immigration system becomes a trend, we recommend that all UK visa residents transfer their BRP/BRC to an e-visa before the end of 2024, and all residents holding UK ILR vignette complete the NTL application as soon as possible.

Should you wish to know more information about eVisas, please do not hesitate to contact Lisa’s Law and our experienced solicitors will be happy to assist you.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

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

Sumit Singh

See Full Bio

News and Insights

Principles deciding whether to grant a newcomer injunction

London City Airport decision

Heathrow Airport decision

Have questions? Get in touch today!

What are the criteria to claim stamp duty relief?

Am I counted as a first-time buyer?

How much is the SDLT for first time buyers?

Have questions? Get in touch today!

The case

The Issue and the Law

Tribunal appeal

The Conclusion

Have questions? Get in touch today!

How is the compensation calculated?

Is the compensation a penalty?

Our thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Zero-hour contracts

Flexible working

Protection for new mothers

Paternity leave

Fire and rehire

Unfair Dismissal Qualifying Period

Sick Pay

Parental leave

Bereavement leave

Our thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Our advice

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Who can become a Guarantor?

What can happen to a Guarantor?

How long will a Guarantor’s liabilities last?

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Challenges brought by the end of free movement

Sector-specific concerns

What solutions does the report offer?

Our thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Who will the closure of the BRP replacement affect?

Still necessary to report lost or stolen BRPs

How will individuals be able to return to the UK

Why are the Home Office no longer issuing BRPs?

Our thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Subscribe to our newsletter