New Bill Puts End to Divorce ‘Blame Games’

Divorce is always going to be a hard thing to go through, whether you’re one half of the unhappy couple, a child of divorce or a close friend caught in the crossfire. It can be a hugely emotional time and often it’s made worse by the ensuing legal battles concerning property and custody of kids.

But, for once, there is some good news for divorce.

At the moment, one spouse has to make accusations about the other’s behaviour, such as being abusive, committing adultery, or otherwise face years of mere separation before a divorce can be official granted – regardless of whether a couple has made a mutual decision to separate permanently.

A new Bill brought forward:

A Bill known as the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill, has been brought to Parliament this week which aims to eradicate these ‘blame games’ that so often occur during divorce proceedings. This is to reduce the level of stress and conflict within the affected families.

The new Bill will achieve this by allowing one spouse – or the couple jointly – to make a statement of irretrievable breakdown. It will also stop one partner contesting a divorce if the other wants one – which in some cases has allowed domestic abusers to exercise further coercive control over their victim.

Some of you may remember this Bill being announced back in June 2019, but it has only officially been brought to Parliament following the latest General Election.

Justice Secretary & Lord Chancellor Robert Buckland said:

“The institution of marriage will always be vitally important, but we must never allow a situation where our laws exacerbate conflict and harm a child’s upbringing.

Our reforms will stop divorcing couples having to make unnecessary allegations against one another and instead help them focus on separating amicably.

By sparing individuals the need to play the blame game, we are stripping out the needless antagonism this creates so families can better move on with their lives.”

Main properties of the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill:

Replace the current requirement to evidence either a conduct or separation ‘fact’ with the provision of a statement of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage (couples can opt to make this a joint statement).
Remove the possibility of contesting the decision to divorce, as a statement will be conclusive evidence that the marriage has irretrievably broken down.
Introduces a new minimum period of 20 weeks from the start of proceedings to confirmation to the court that a conditional order of divorce may be made, allowing greater opportunity for couples to agree practical arrangements for the future where reconciliation is not possible and divorce is inevitable.

A positive step

This Bill is a step towards a more harmonious path to family justice – avoiding confrontation wherever possible and reducing its damaging effect on children in particular.

Crucially, it will also introduce a 20-week period between the initial petition stage and when the court grants the provisional decree of divorce. This will provide a meaningful period of reflection and a chance for the couple to change their minds, or where divorce is inevitable, it will provide a decent amount of time for them to make plans for dealing with the divorce in the future, and make appropriate arrangements.

Contact us!

If you have questions about divorce or any other type of legal enquiry, please do not hesitate to contact us on 020 7928 0276 or email into info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Immigration law at music festivals – what’s the score?

Music festivals can be great fun, and are becoming more popular than ever. Attendances have been increasing steadily, with around 4 million people in the UK now attending at least one per year.

When music-lovers are pitching their tents and discussing which of the performers they want to watch during their time at the festival, immigration law and other rules the event organisers have had to abide by to make it all possible are seldom topics of conversation within the camp.

However, it is an important and interesting subject and an area of immigration law often forgotten by the masses – we are here to tell you what is required for a festival to go on in the UK and to allow migrants to perform in these festivals as entertainers.

Qualifying circumstances:

There are certain requirements that need to be met if a new festival is going to be accepted onto the list of official permit free festivals in the UK.

They must have:

been established for at least 3 years
had an audience of at least 15,000 for each of the last 3 festivals
an expected audience of at least 15,000 throughout the forthcoming event
at least 15 non-European Economic Area (EEA) performers who have performed at each of the last 3 festivals
at least 15 non-EEA performers who have been invited for the current year

Supporting documents related to the festival:

Prospective festival organisers must show:

paper copies of the event brochures or programmes for the last 3 years
a letter from the Arts Council, or another such body if they support the event
press cuttings relating to the event for the last 3 years
confirmation of ticket sales and attendance details for the last 3 years
a letter from the local police or licensing authority concerning the cultural event or festival
the number of all non-EEA performers and their nationalities for the last 3 years and for the forthcoming event
other additional evidence if requested by the Home Office

Who is eligible to perform?

Performers who meet the criteria of the Standard Visitor route. This means that they:

will leave the UK at the end of their visit; and
will not live in the UK for extended periods through frequent or successive visits, or make the UK their main home; and
is genuinely seeking entry for a purpose that is permitted by the visitor routes (these are and
will not undertake any prohibited activities; and
must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

Usually, working and earning money in the UK is a prohibited activity on this visa type. However, an act is allowed to earn money by performing at a permit free festival if they meet the other criteria.

The Permitted Paid Engagements visa is often used by artists performing at festivals.

Eligibility requirements for a permitted paid engagements visit visa or leave to enter. The service that the visitor will provide must:

be arranged before the applicant travels to the UK; and

be declared as part of the application for a visit visa or leave to enter; and

be evidenced by a formal invitation, as required by Appendix 4; and

relate to the applicant’s area of expertise and occupation overseas.

Paying the performers:

Performers will usually expect to be paid for their services and can often make a lot of money from festivals, especially if they are a headline act. For example, rap superstar Eminem was paid £2m for a single performance at V Festival.

Less well known artists can be paid for their participation in the festival under the Standard Visitor route. Where entertainers or artists are established professionals it may also be possible for them to use the Permitted Paid Engagement visitor route.

Which festivals already make the list?

Africa Utopia (Southbank Centre)

Aldeburgh Festival

Barbican Festivals (Only Connect, Summer Festival, Autumn 1, Autumn 2)

Belfast International Arts Festival

Billingham International Folklore Festival of World Dance

Boomtown Festival

Breakin’ Convention

Brighton Festival

Brighton Fringe

Brouhaha International Street Festival

BST Hyde Park

Cambridge Folk Festival

Camp Bestival

Celtic Connections

Cheltenham Festivals (Jazz/Science/Music/Literature)

Cornwall International Male Choral Festival

Dance Umbrella

Download

Edinburgh Festival Fringe

Edinburgh International Festival

Edinburgh Jazz and Blues Festival

Glasgow International Jazz Festival

Glastonbury

Glyndebourne

Greenbelt

Harrogate International Festivals

Hay Festival

Huddersfield Contemporary Music Festival

Isle of Wight Festival

Latitude

Leeds Festival

Llangollen International Musical Eisteddfod

London Jazz Festival (EFG)

Manchester International Festival

Meltdown (Southbank Centre)

Norfolk & Norwich Festival

Reading Festival

Snape Proms

The Royal Edinburgh Military Tattoo

Wireless

WOMAD

WWE Live

How can people apply to start up a festival?

Budding festival organisers can send evidence electronically to the permit free festival admin inbox. Large documents can be sent as zip files.

Hard copies of brochures or programmes can be sent to:

Visit and Visa Policy
Border Security and Visa Policy
Home Office
2nd Floor Peel
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF

If festival organisers have a query about these provisions please contact the permit free festival admin inbox.

Need legal advice? Contact us!

If you have any questions relating to this topic, or have any other legal enquiry, please do not hesitate to contact us on 020 7928 0276 or email into info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

January 8, 2020
2020, Christmas, Law Firm, New Year

Happy New Year from Lisa’s Law!

A new year has begun and we wanted to take the time to wish all of you the very best for 2020! We are excited to embark on a fresh decade and have many great things to share with you in the coming months.

We hope that you all had wonderful Christmas breaks and have come into this New Year raring to go, as we certainly have!

Speaking of Christmas break, we hope you enjoy the pictures below taken from our festive party which was held at the beautiful Sofitel St James Hotel in central London!

Xmas Festivities!

We were picked up by a vintage London bus, complete with Lisa’s Law written on the front! We thought that was a very nice touch.

Our theme for the night was Masquerade Ball!

The venue was very nicely lit up, and the food provided was delicious. We would definitely recommend it if anyone is thinking of hosting an event.

We were welcomed with a champagne reception which helped everyone stay in the festive spirit!

Once everyone was seated our Managing Director, Chuanli Ding, gave a speech to congratulate everyone on a successful year.

A professional singer serenaded us while we ate, playing a selection of Christmas hits as well us other familiar tracks.

We had a great time, it was a splendid way to end a busy and productive year.

Here’s to 2020, we wish you all the very best and as always, please never hesitate to contact us. We are here for all your legal needs and look forward to what this new decade will bring.

Happy new year!

Contact us!

If you have legal enquires, please do not hesitate to contact us on 020 7928 0276 or email into info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Missing the EU Settlement Scheme Deadline – A Word of Advice

First things first:

The deadline to apply for a post-Brexit status in the UK under the EU Settlement Scheme is 30 June 2021 or,
If the UK leaves the EU without a deal

You are required to be residing in the UK before it leaves the EU to apply. The deadline for applying will be 31 December 2020.

You can apply here if you meet the criteria. There is no visa fees for the application applicable.

Boris has won the election:

This means that Brexit is now more likely that ever, in a no-deal scenario or otherwise. It is vital that you apply for status in time.

Consequences for missing the deadline:

Thinking in terms of a worst case scenario for those who do not apply in time, the consequence may well be either their self departure voluntarily or removal from the UK.

However, the Home Office has said that those who miss the deadline “for a good reason” will be given another chance to apply, but no details about what constitutes a good reason have been revealed as of yet. We are yet to receive the further update on the same very soon. Keep a look out on our blogs for the same.

Some potential reasons may be a close family bereavement or serious health issues, but these are yet to be fully confirmed.

The importance of being aware:

Under such a strict regime, Settlement Scheme applicants will have to account for and possibly provide evidence of the reasons for their delayed applications in the considerable time.

This could be the case even if they may never have been aware of the need to apply for settled status.

Hostile environment policies may apply to such people, limiting their access to the NHS, benefits, employment and accommodation as well as making them liable for detention and removal.

It may also hinder their application, as unlawful residence is criminalised in the UK.

Guidance from the Home Office:

Home Office employees will decide each case upon their own individual and specific merits case by case, but examples of reasons that might be considered beyond the control of applicants are:

the applicant was admitted to hospital for emergency treatment (evidenced by an official letter verifying the dates of admission and discharge and the nature of the treatment)
a close family bereavement
an educational institution was not sufficiently prompt in issuing a Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS)

The Home Office guidance on applications from overstayers provides some further examples if you are interested in reading more on the topic.

We are here to help:

We understand that it can be tough and confusing when applying for status, but we are here to help you the whole way. Do not hesitate to get in contact with us on 020 7928 0276 or email into info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

January 3, 2020
Case Study, Custody, Family Law, Immigration, Law, Litigation, Visa

Custody battle between parents – how to make the best of a bad situation

The love between a parent and their child forms the base of the strongest bond imaginable between humans, and most families will do whatever it takes to stay together. However, sometimes life gets in the way and family situations are not always going to be perfect. We recently handled a sensitive family case, and are proud of how it turned out.

The case in question:

For the purposes of client confidentiality, we will call the mother Helen, the father Vincent and their 12 year old son Mark.

Helen is a Japanese national who came to the UK on a student visa when she was 18. She met Vincent, who is 30 years her elder, while living here and together they have a baby boy called Mark.

Due to his father being a British national, and the fact that he was born here as well, Mark is automatically also a British national.

After a couple of years of living happily in the UK as a family, Vincent was offered the chance to work in Spain, which he agreed to. Hesitant, but wanting the family to stay together, Helen agreed to move to Spain with her husband and son.

The beginning of trouble…

While living in Spain, Helen started to feel increasingly depressed and detached. She knew nothing of Spanish culture, had no friends and could not speak the language. In turn, she could not find work or be financially independent and her life was becoming more and more tedious as the months went by. Although she still very much enjoyed looking after Mark, she often felt very alone.

Additionally, the house where the family was staying in Spain was not child friendly. It lacked a proper heating system and had a leaky roof and poorly maintained flooring.

During this time, Vincent started spending less time at home as he became more and more busy with his work. This added to the loneliness Helen felt.

This feeling of isolation and sadness went on for many years, until Mark turned 10 years old.

Action was taken…

Helen and Mark took a trip to Japan to see Helen’s parents and have a break from the challenges life in Spain involved. They had a nice time, but when it was time to return to Spain, Helen was having major doubts.

They ended up returning directly to the UK instead of going back to Spain, where Vincent still was. Helen did make Vincent aware of this before boarding the plane, and feeling very nervous Vincent called the police who intercepted Helen and Mark when they landed in the UK.

Seeing that the child was perfectly fine, the two of them were released. They went to Birmingham to stay with a friend of Helen’s.

What happened next?

Vincent, concerned and surprised, came back to the UK to try and sort out the issues. He still very much wants Mark to live with him in Spain. He took Helen to court and asked for Mark to be able to go back to Spain to live with him.

Due to English not being her first language, and her knowledge of the law not having much depth, Helen turned to us to learn what options she had.

Helen’s worry was made worse as she knew the odds were stacked against her. Mark had spent most of his time in Spain, and so the judge would surely see that as a sign that he should return there with his father. Helen was worried she would hardly ever be able to see her son.

A complex case…

This case is complicated as it involves both UK law and Spanish law. Due to the fact that Mark was born in the UK but spent many of his childhood years in Spain, the Spanish courts have the right to make the final decision on where he should stay. Of course, they will take the UK courts opinion into consideration as well.

However, since Vincent filed a lawsuit in the UK court, under the Hague Convention, the court has its jurisdiction to decide whether or not to order that Mark return to Spain, as his habitual residence. However, the UK court’s jurisdiction is limited. The discretion is very narrow on grounds of intolerability of the child and the carer (the mother), should they to return to Spain; and the child’s objection to return, although subject to suitability of age. (Here Mark is still too young for his objection to carry much weight).

What can we do?

First of all, we need to collect various bits of evidence to prove that Helen is, and has always been, the primary caregiver of Mark. This can come in the form of photos, phone call records, various relevant data and records of school life, Mark’s medical records, and so on. This is an integral part of Helen’s case.

Since Vincent is so often working long hours and had previously been out of the country for work, his role in the family is more of a financial one, whereas the actual day to day care of Mark has been largely handled by Helen. If it would be intolerable for Helen to return, or if she could not return, then it will most certainly be intolerable for Mark to return.

Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service

A second important point is that Helen obeyed the court arrangement and took Mark to give a psychological report to CAFCASS (Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service).

The results show that if Mark suddenly loses his mother’s care completely, it will most probably be intolerable for Mark’s to live his normal life upon return. He has spent far more time with his mother than his father and her presence in his life is paramount.

The report also clearly found that Mark would prefer to stay in the UK with his mother.

Mother’s mental health and immigration barrier

The third point is that Spain was completely unacceptable and inhabitable to Helen, and led her to suffer severe mental torture and fear to an intolerable level. In fact, according to the relevant legal test, her fear to go back needs not to be objectively real, as long as the court found her fear is subjectively genuine, it is acceptable that it would be intolerable for her to return.

In addition, our immigration expertise made valuable contribution to the case as we found that without a valid status, it is not possible for Helen to stay in the UK legally and she had to return to Japan. If that is the case, it would be impossible for Mark to visit her often enough and it would be almost certain that the situation would be intolerable for Mark.

Father’s history:

Another part of the case that the court had to take into consideration was the fact that Vincent has had a family in the past, and his child has had a child, making Vincent a grandfather. Vincent’s grandson lives in Birmingham and has become a friend to Mark. This means that Mark has a relative in Birmingham, adding to the case that he should in fact remain in the UK.

The result…

In summary, for the best interests of the child, the judge ruled that although Mark would have to return to Spain with Vincent, he shall visit the UK to live with Helen every weekend, which is an exercise of a discretion very much in Helen’s favour, thanks to our immigration expertise incorporating her immigration status and needs. The court indeed also specifically permitted this order to be disclosed for Helen’s immigration status for the ease of her immigration application.

What we want to emphasize here is that because Mark’s main residence is still officially Spain, according to international law, the right to determine the contact and custody of Mark is actually the Spanish court; British courts have limited power in this decision, albeit with directory effect, which is very important for future proceeding in Spain.

However, as it is in the child’s voluntary choice to be with his mother in the UK, and if the child and mother are separated for long periods of time it would cause unbearable anguish for them both, we were able to win the court over to this shared custody.

This result came as a great relief to Helen, who was worried that she would get to see her son a lot less frequently.

What should Helen do next?

It must be noted that Helen returned to the UK from Japan this time with a visitor visa.

Many people know that the party holding a British visitor visa cannot stay in the UK for more than 180 days (6 months).

However, since Mark was born in the UK, Helen can actually consider applying for a more permanent visa through her child’s British status. Therefore, Helen can actually try to apply for a parental visa.

But of course, if she wants to apply for a parent visa, Helen must meet the relevant requirements, that is:

have sufficient financial conditions to support her and her child’s life in the UK,
have enough housing,
pass the English A1 test,
prove that she can personally and directly contact the child (Direct access in person), and
prove that she intends to continue to play an active role in raising and educating the child.

As long as she can meet these requirements, she should be able to attain the parental visa and be able to stay in the UK on a permanent basis!

Any questions? Contact us!

Our team here at Lisa’s Law is highly knowledgeable in this area. If you have any questions relating to this topic, or have any other legal enquiry, please do not hesitate to contact us on 020 7928 0276 or email into info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Client receives HUGE unexpected bill leading to a true David vs Goliath success story!

Life can be full of unwelcome surprises.

Picture the scene:

A businessman rents out a premises from their local council, paying them rent and believing that the energy bills are included in that rent. They have never received a bill and have always assumed that the landlord takes care of it.

Once they have moved out of that property, out of the blue they are hit with a massive energy bill from a major UK energy provider, asking them to pay a huge amount of money for the energy they used throughout their time at the premises. Not only this, but interest has been added to the already massive cost.

Well, this is exactly what happened to one of our recent clients. It was our job to help him during his time of need, and we are proud of the outcome we managed to achieve for him.

The case in question:

For confidentiality purposes some of the details will be altered in this article, but it is all based upon an original case. We will refer to the client as Mr Cronin.

Mr Cronin runs a business in Sheffield, leasing out a space from the local government. When he first signed this lease, the local government had added a section which stated the tenant must also pay a regular ‘service fee’ on top of the agreed monthly rental payments. He assumed that this would cover the energy costs, and this belief was affirmed in his mind when he never received any separate energy bills throughout his tenancy.

After a few years of operating his business out of this property, the government notify Mr Cronin that he must leave, as there is a planned demolition of the building to make way for new developments.

Mr Cronin left the premises, and set out to continue his business elsewhere. That’s when he was hit with the giant energy bill, which came completely out of nowhere.

The energy provider demanded 2 years-worth of energy bills, and sent an official request letter. If Mr Cronin were unable to respond to the request letter, the next step is would be both parties attending a court hearing, resulting in a judge deciding the matter.

Extra costs can start to stack up when cases such as this reach court unsettled, which is why Mr Cronin turned to us for help.

Assessing the situation:

The amount that the energy provider was initially asking of our client was £50,000. A mighty sum indeed. However, they did concede to accepting £28,000 if it was paid up front. Still a very large bill to face on unexpected terms.

Preparing a defence:

One of the first things we noticed was that Mr Cronin was being charged for energy used for a period after he had already vacated the premises. This is obviously not his responsibility and he should not be made to pay for energy used during this time.

In order to prove this, we provided the lease contract between Mr Cronin and the local government, and a letter of notification from the local government informing Mr Cronin that the property is to be demolished. After they received this, this part of the bill was disregarded by all.

Second to this, we proposed that Mr Cronin had not received any energy bills during his tenancy, and that it had only been made clear that he owed money after he had already vacated the property.

It is due to the lack of correspondence between Mr Cronin and the energy provider that we argued that there was no official contractual relationship between the two parties. Mr Cronin always assumed that the additional ‘service fee’ that he was paying would take care of the energy bills.

A happy ending?

In the end, the energy supplier agreed to allow Mr Cronin to resolve the dispute with a figure of £10,000. This would be the entirety of the payment, with no further payments down the road. This payment will also mean that there is no judicial follow up for either parties.

It should be noted that this is a good result for Mr Cronin; in addition to avoiding the arrears that were too high to bear in the first place, he also avoided a lawsuit with a major energy provider in the event of a loss.

If the two parties had not come to some agreement before facing the courts, the result would have been far worse for Mr Cronin and at the very least more of an inconvenience for the energy provider. Financially, Cronin would have had to pay a lot more in legal fees, and the energy provider would obviously have the means to hire an expensive team of specialist lawyers – it would have been needlessly stressful and it is much better to get it sorted in advance.

When you think that the total cost was initially £50,000, and then the possibility of that increasing to around £100,000 if you consider legal fees if it went to court unsettled and even got defeated, the final payment of £10,000 is actually a very successful compromise for Mr Cronin.

What can we learn from this case?

As a lesson from the above case, we want to remind all readers who are running a business that when signing a commercial lease contract they should first carefully understand what the terms of the contract are and what it is they are paying for. Ask as many questions as you need to fully understand the situation. If anything is made unclear, do not sign the contract until it has been made clear.

In the case of service charges, these will usually go towards things such as the buildings general upkeep, and does not necessarily include any individual’s energy bills.

However, one positive that this case really highlights is the fact that no matter how unlikely a victory seems, it is always worth trying anyway. Mr Cronin came to us to challenge a huge energy provider, and in his case the underdog came out on top.

Here at Lisa’s Law we will fight your corner no matter what, and will always be upfront and practical in the advice we give.

Any other questions? Contact us!

Our team here at Lisa’s Law is ready to receive your instruction. If you have any questions relating to this topic, or have any other legal enquiry, please do not hesitate to contact us on 020 7928 0276 or email into info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Subletting Chaos – what could go wrong without a landlord’s permission?

Like all areas of business, things do not always go to plan in the world of conveyancing. It is always important to know exactly what you are getting into, and what type of people you are dealing with before even thinking about entering into a contractual agreement. Subletting, a popular way for tenants to let part or all of their home to someone else, is one of these areas that requires careful consideration.

This isn’t always as easy as it sounds.

One unlucky businessman faced losing over £90K after he was caught in a subletting scam, and while we cannot blame him for being enthusiastic about getting his new venture underway there are certainly some more cautious steps that he could have taken to avoid the mess he has found himself in.

The case in question:

The case today concerns two restaurateurs, Mr Choi and Mr Park. Looking to start a new business in Kingston upon Thames, Mr Choi entered into a subletting agreement with Mr Park, whereby Park would sublet a commercial premises to Choi in exchange for funds.

What Choi was not aware was the fact that Park had not received permission for this sublet from the property’s landlord. This is a vital part of any subletting. The lack of permission can make it an illegal deal.

Choi paid a fee of £60,000 plus a monthly payment of £9,500 to Park for the use of the property. On top of this, Choi redecorated and rebranded the property, calling it Big Burger. He put much effort, care and money into what he thought was a legitimate property from which to run his business.

Of course, when the landlord found out that Park had been subletting the premises to Choi, he retook possession of it and essentially kicked Choi out.

Choi then also found out that Park had lied to him about the lease length, by which the lease was due to run for only less than 5 years instead of ‘16 years’ that Park had claimed.

What happened next?

Choi claimed that he had entered into the agreement with Park to rent the premises, pending assignment of the lease, as a consequence of false statements made by Park, and that he had, consequently, suffered a hefty financial loss.

Park did not take this lying down. He contended, among other things, that:

he had not been acting in his personal capacity when he had entered into the agreement with Choi;

Choi had been aware that the agreement was an illegal sublet, not an assignment of the lease; and

he had simply expressed a willingness to assign the lease at some point in the future, subject to payment of the rent

What claims did Choi bring against Park?

There were a total of 5 claims brought against Park. They were:

fraudulent misrepresentation

breach of contract, said to be implied into the agreement;

a total failure of consideration (a financial claim in respect of the payments made to the defendants);

quantum meruit (a financial claim for the return of the value of works Choi had carried out at the premises); and

unlawful means of conspiracy

The results:

Obviously there was some back and forth contesting between the two parties, but essentially in the end Park was judged with not giving Choi the full picture, therefore misleading him into accepting the unlawful agreement.

The law is well established in dealing with cases such as this. It states:

‘Where a person has entered into a contract after a misrepresentation has been made to him by another party thereto and as a result thereof he has suffered loss, then, if the person making the misrepresentation would be liable to damages… unless he proves that he had reasonable ground to believe and did believe up to the time the contract was made the facts represented were true’

If Choi have had access to all the correct information, it was held by the Court that he would never have entered into the deal. It cost him dearly, both financially and mentally. As a consequence of the false statements made by Park, Choi had suffered loss. Therefore, Choi’s claim for misrepresentation succeeded and he was able to regain his money, a sum of £91,532.52.

What can we learn from this subletting case?

There are a few lessons we can learn from this case, mainly concerning the importance of due diligence in business transactions and serious consequences it may lead to in failing to do so.

If a person is deceived, such as the case with Choi in the above case, they are normally able to sue the person who misled them. In this case, Mr Park was the deceiver as he had provided false statements in order to convince Choi to enter into a contract with him.

But it is not always as easy as that.

Even if the innocent party is found to be due compensation from their deceiver, he/she may not be compensated for various reasons. The deceiver may have vanished (say, moving to other part of the world), or simply not have the means to pay up (such as becoming bankrupt). This can potentially lead to the innocent party spending even more time and money, and experiencing more stress, for essentially no reward.

The most effective preventive measure is always not to enter a business transaction unless you have carried out sufficient background check, to know the business, the property and the person. Should Mr Choi have done so, or engaged a lawyer to do so, he would have found the remaining term of the lease and whether permission was required from the landlord, rather than relying on Mr Parker’s misstatement. He would not definitely have rushed into the transaction and found himself experiencing so much hassle and trouble. It is purely a matter of chance to some extent that Mr Choi has managed to recover his loss.

What else could Mr Choi do if he was unable to recover his losses from Mr Park?

In theory, Mr Choi might be able to apply to the Court to intervene. One possibility would be for the landlord to forfeit the lease and grant it to Mr Choi, provided that the landlord is satisfied that Mr Choi is a person of good standing.

However, it should note that such action is more down to the landlord’s discretion, rather than Mr Choi’s right. Unless Mr Choi has evidence to prove that the landlord had been aware that he was trading in the property as a tenant (in fact, in this case, Mr Choi had none of such evidence), the landlord could well refuse his request. Even if the landlord is willing to grant a new lease to Mr Choi, clearly he/she will expect Mr Choi to bear all the relevant costs, which is likely not to be low.

How to correctly contract a sublet?

When trying to contract a sublet, it is vital that you first read the initial lease thoroughly to see whether any approval is required (in most cases, the answer is a yes). If so, no subletting can be lawfully made without such approval.

The last thing you want to do is risking it . It is not worth it and the chances of being found out can be very high.

The landlord will then have right to repossess the property and evict you. You may lose not only the monies you have paid to the tenant, but also all your investment in promoting the business, your time and energy.

Once you know the landlord’s approval is required, you need to provide evidence of your relevant trading experience, credit rating, business plan and even immigration history for the landlord’s consideration.

Although a landlord has right to decide how he can let into his/her property, most leases will provide that he/she cannot refuse such approval unreasonably; otherwise, the outgoing tenant can challenge him/her.

Once the approval is granted, it will be prudent to have a lawyer to check out thoroughly about the property, business and the contracts so that there will be no other issues which may affect your business in the future.

Any other issues? Contact us!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

December 2, 2019
Business, Case Study, Immigration, Law, Tax, Tax Avoidance

Tax avoidance case successfully handled! Client saves over £70,000!

The running of a business can take its toll. From balancing finances, looking after staff, providing a good service and everything in-between, it is no wonder that thousands of business owners in the UK frequently experience high levels of stress!

That stress is multiplied tenfold when you are accused of running your business in an illegal manner, which is exactly what happened to a client we recently worked with.

Lisa’s Law recently handled a tax case that had been the bane of a business owner’s life for over three years. So much of his time and energy had been going towards sorting this issue out, that he felt he was losing control of his life.

For the purposes of this article, we will refer to the client as Arjun.

Details of the case:

Arjun is originally from India and owns a restaurant in the UK. The first time his restaurant was visited by the HMRC it was because they were accusing him of deliberately declaring less cash earnings in order to pay less tax on the revenue made by his business.

Investigators from the tax bureau found that the restaurant had deliberately not filed the cash revenues in the past tax years in order to escape the VAT, and the restaurant also had violations of Corporate Tax as a result of under-declared VAT sales.

As a result of this serious accusation, Arjun was looking at a huge bill to pay; over £100,000 worth of taxes, interest and penalties, plus HMRC legal costs that would need to be accounted for if left uncontested.

Arjun explained that part of the issue was that a former employee of his had been stealing cash and not running it through the register correctly, so it was hard for him to keep track of the exact cash income of his restaurant.

As you can understand, this left Arjun with a considerable burden on his shoulders, which is why he turned to our litigation team for help. Not only was he worried about the financial side of this issue, but even more so the criminal side of it, as he may be held liable for VAT and tax fraud after the HMRC claims for back payment. His immigration status and livelihood would be affected massively if he was accused of this crime.

Cash as a percentage of total income:

It is important to remember that the HMRC is interested in specifically the cash takings of the business in this case. The HRMC estimated that cash dealings amounted to around 25% of the total income of the restaurant. This amount was agreed to when Arjun was questioned by HRMC representatives which was under duress, as he was pressurised into answering the questions without legal or accounting advice.

Also, the HRMC saw that within the local area of Arjun’s restaurant, similar establishments take in around a 30% cash income as well, which they use in favour of their argument.

Lisa’s Law to the rescue:

This case had been dragging on for a few years and was really negatively impacting Arjun’s life; the stress of it was impacting on his mental health. He suffered from anxiety and depression. He lost interest in running his business and was not keen on building a future.

Arjun was recommended Lisa’s Law by a friend and we immediately set to work on establishing a couple of things that would work in his favour:

Make it clear the Arjun did not deliberately fail to declare taxes.

and,

Reduce the percentage of cash income expected by the HRMC, meaning a decrease in the total of what Arjun must pay overall.

What we argued:

Firstly, we put forward that the initial estimate that both the HRMC and Arjun came to, in terms of the percentage of cash income generated by the business, of around 25%, was reached in speculative terms which were unfair to Arjun.

Arjun was not allowed to seek professional help from an accountant or law firm, and was subject to high pressure questions by the HRMC representatives. This meant that an important part of the case made against Arjun is actually invalid.

We argue that the cash income is actually much lower than 25% in the case of Arjun’s business.

To back up our claim, we referred to an official survey issued by UK Finance, the UK Payments Market Survey 2019.

Within this survey it is made clear that cash dealings within Arjun’s industry has declined in recent years, and that the 25% estimate made by the HRMC over a number of years is unrealistic.

This support from a credible third party helped us to convince the HRMC to reassess their cash percentage evaluation.

Deliberate or simply unaware?

Determining whether Arjun was deliberately not declaring the correct amount of income or if it was something he was unaware of is arguably the most vital part of this case. It dictates whether it is seen as criminal activity, or just simple careless. It also makes a vast difference in what Arjun will have to pay at the end of the case.

We put forward that because Arjun spends most of his time in the back of the restaurant preparing food, he was unable to properly supervise his staff. This led to one of his employees to begin stealing cash from the till. In turn, this led to incorrect amounts being submitted to the tax officials.

Success

After presenting this evidence to the HRMC, they eventually conceded that Arjun was only guilty of ‘Failure to take Reasonable Care’ rather than planned tax evasion. This is a much better result for him in every way imaginable, and means he is not seen as a criminal in the eyes of the law.

Further to this, the tax bureau’s determination of Arjun’s cash income was eventually compromised at 18%, instead of the original 25%.

This meant that rather than paying over £100,000 in bills and damages, Arjun had to pay a far smaller amount of £30,000. This is also a sum that he felt he was able to pay. If he had not been able to meet this payment, he could have also negotiated a payment arrangement with HMRC through Lisa’s Law to spread his liabilities over a period of time. This would avoid bankruptcy for himself and his business. This is a resounding success for Arjun and for us here at Lisa’s Law!

What can we learn from this case?

In cases such as this often the main focus is to minimise the damage taken by the client, in terms of not only financial woes but reputational effects too.

Co-operation with the tax bureau is necessary, however clear and detailed evidence to support the client’s claims, and try to work out the best deal possible. This is especially important when trying to dissuade the HRMC from considering the case a criminal act or not. It is very likely that when demands are met and the client is no longer considered a criminal, the fees to be paid will be reduced. Being co-operative with HMRC is also important, as they will be more willing to consider the defence and work out a mutual resolution.

It is often very easy to make mistakes when doing your taxes, particularly in the hectic food industry. When a problem becomes apparent it is always best to face it head on with support from professionals.

The best way to do this is to have a rigorous bookkeeping system and always take care and time when sorting through taxes. As well as Lisa’s Law, we also have Lisa’s Accountancy who offer excellent professional advice when it comes to doing taxes correctly.

You can reach them on 020 7096 2722 or email them at info@lisastax.co.uk.

Contact us!

If you have any questions about this, or just want to have a chat about any legal issue whatsoever, please do not hesitate to get in contact with us on 020 7928 0276 or email in to info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

We are here for you!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Sole Representative of an Overseas Company Visa – The Do’s and Don’ts

Sole Representative is a UK visa category allowing an employee/member of an organisation to enter the UK as a representative of an overseas company for the purpose of establishing a wholly owned subsidiary or branch in the UK for the overseas parent company. This visa has become a very common and famous choice for corporate organisations and new entrepreneurs with businesses abroad.

This visa option is vital for any non-European or non-UK national business looking to invest in the UK as it will allow the employee of their business to not only enter the UK, but also set up a wholly owned subsidiary or branch of the overseas parent company.

It is very important in order to acquire a successful decision for the same, it has to be made sure that all of the set required criteria and eligibility are satisfied and met and upon presenting the sufficient evidence obtained and submitted at the time of the application.

It is also equally vital that you choose who your representative will be in advance as they are required to meet certain criteria. If your representative is an overseas national with no automatic rights to work in the UK, they are required to fulfil further criteria in order to be satisfy the requirements under this visa.

Are the objectives met?

In order to qualify for this visa category, an applicant must:

Have sufficient funds to support themselves and their dependants (if applicable) in the UK – termed as maintenance;
Had passed the test for satisfying the English language requirement;
Applicant must have extensive knowledge and expertise in the particular business or work industry;
Must be held on a senior position within the company, but not as a majority shareholder.
Authorised to make decisions on behalf of the organisation or company;
An applicant must be employed for the company outside the UK, whose headquarters and principal place of business are outside the UK for at least a period of 12 months, prior to submitting the visa application.
They must not intend to undertake any other work or business except the current one in the UK.
Also last but not the least is that they are intending to establish the company’s first commercial presence in the UK, e.g. a registered branch or a wholly-owned subsidiary.

Is there a minimum salary requirement for the sole representative?

Where there isn’t any minimum salary level requirement to be satisfied, however the applicant must be earning enough to support themselves and their family members/dependents for this application. The remuneration or the pay should reflect their appropriate skills, experience and knowledge. They are not eligible to receive any public funds whatsoever.

Who can be the so-called dependents of a Sole Representative applicant in the UK?

Dependents include:

Spouse
Civil Partner
Unmarried Partner
Same-sex Partner
Your child or child who is under the age of 18

Is there possibility for an extension of a Sole Representative Visa after the initial application within the UK?

After the initial grant of the visa as a Representative of an Overseas Business, for the period of 3 years; there is possibility if the further extension of the same visa for next 2 years.

To enable for this extension, it is very important for an applicant to still meeting the requirements continue to demonstrate to act as sole representative for the same overseas company. Followed on after which they will be able to apply for their settlement after the completion of 5 years in the UK.

Can a Sole Representative applicant apply for the Indefinite Leave to Remain?

After the completion of 5 years in the UK, the applicant and their dependent(s) could apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain (settlement or Permanent Residency) on the condition that they are still continuing to meet with the criteria above.

What are the DO’s and the DON’T’S under the sole representative visa?

DO’s

Applicant can work full time for the employer;
Can apply and bring their family (‘dependants’) to the UK;
The applicant can make the extension for the said visa multiple times;
Applicant can also apply for the settlement in the UK after 5 years;
They can remain in the UK even if the company’s circumstances change and they have been in the UK for more than 2 years.

DON’T’S:

The applicant cannot be employed for themselves or any other employment or company except the one they are working for;
The applicant cannot continue to live and remain in the UK, even after the employment contract as their sole representative arrangement is ended by the employer;
They applicant cannot switch to this visa category in-country or out of the country whatsoever from any other visa category;
The applicant is not eligible to receive any kind of benefits or government public funds.

Contact us!

We are here for you!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

Family reunions – A success story from Lisa’s Law

To be separated from your family for a long time is one of the hardest and most heart-breaking ordeals a person can go through. This is heightened when it is a parent who is separated from their child, with hardly any means of reuniting.

Even when the child grows to be almost 18, in the eyes of the parent they are still there to be taken care of and made safe. Yet, in the eyes of the Home Office this is not the case. This means that in a case where a parent is applying for their child to come to the UK in order to be reunited, once that child turns 18 the chances of success plummet like a lead balloon. Time is truly of the essence.

We recently had a case where a parent wanted to have his child come to the UK after years of separation, and it was made all the more urgent by the imminent 18^th birthday of said child.

The case in question:

In order to keep the identity of our client’s private, we will call the father in this case Paul and his son James.

Paul holds a formal refugee status in the UK and claims to have come to the UK initially as a victim of human trafficking. When he first arrived he applied for refugee status and mentioned in his application that he had a child back in his home country of the Philippines. This application was never replied to.

After waiting for about two years, Paul submitted the application again, and after several years of waiting, was confirmed by the Home Office to be a victim of human trafficking. After this was confirmed, he received official refugee status.

After 10 years of living in the UK, Paul was granted settled status and his main priority now is getting his son to the UK so they can finally be together again.

The 10 year wait:

Before getting the official settled status, Paul did not dare to leave the United Kingdom for fear that it would affect his application in a negative way. This means the separation between the father and the son lasted for more than 10 years.

Of course while Paul was in the UK, James was back in the Philippines growing up. So much time flew past that the boy who was separated from his father all those years ago is now nearly a man in the eyes of the law; his 18^th birthday only a couple of months away.

What occurred?

Throughout this 10 year period, James lived in the Philippines with his grandparents (the parents of Paul, his mother sadly passed away many years ago). While the grandparents enjoyed taking care of James, they are growing old themselves and may need care in the future.

Paul sent money back to James in order to support him, and they frequently spoke on the phone and through text message. Paul gave advice and always had a major input in every decision regarding James’ upbringing.

Proof and circumstances:

Taking into consideration the above, there are some key elements present that point to this case being successful, and that can be seen as guidelines for others looking to pursue a similar cause.

For example: Although Paul and James have not lived together for a long time, Paul still has the responsibility to support his James and must have an ‘active role’ in his life – considering the case under the ‘sole responsibility aspect’.

So, Paul must provide sufficient evidence to prove that James’ financial stability and direction of education etc. is very much in Paul’s control. This can be done by looking at bank transfers, transcripts of conversations, copies of texts and emails between Paul and James, the grandparents and James’ teachers back in the Philippines.

All this shows Paul’s concern with the development of James, meaning he is active in the child’s life.

Another circumstance is the ageing of James’ grandparents who currently look after him. This becomes a factor in favour of James coming to the UK, as soon they will be too old to take care of him effectively.

All-important DNA test

For this case we felt that it was necessary to prove a blood relation between the two parties, so we arranged James and Paul to have their DNA taken and compared, so that the Home Office could have no doubt of their relation.

It is important to note that the Home Office only accepts DNA results from endorsed DNA testing facilities. The list is always being updated, which you can see here: https://www.gov.uk/get-dna-test.

Success!

After all of the above was taken into consideration, and the positive results were sent back from the DNA facility we are pleased to report that the application was approved and Paul and James have been happily reunited!

What can we learn from this case?

Through this case, we can know that often there is much complexity and difficulty involved in cases of this nature.

Especially in the very critical situations (for instance in this case, the child is about to turn 18 years old), you need to be cautious in preparing for such applications, and strike while there is still time to make a difference.

If the applicant is experiencing any uncertainty when preparing for an application, it is best to contact and consult a professional lawyer as early as possible, and try to give themselves enough time to prepare; this will also be more helpful for the lawyers who take the case on.

Contact us!

If you are interested in cases such as this, or just want to have a chat about any legal issue whatsoever, please do not hesitate to get in contact with us on 020 7928 0276 or email in to info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

We are here for you!

lisaslaw@web

See Full Bio

News and Insights

A new Bill brought forward:

A positive step

Contact us!

Qualifying circumstances:

Who is eligible to perform?

Paying the performers:

Which festivals already make the list?

How can people apply to start up a festival?

Need legal advice? Contact us!

Xmas Festivities!

Contact us!

First things first:

Boris has won the election:

Consequences for missing the deadline:

The importance of being aware:

Guidance from the Home Office:

We are here to help:

The case in question:

The beginning of trouble…

Action was taken…

What happened next?

A complex case…

What can we do?

Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service

Mother’s mental health and immigration barrier

Father’s history:

The result…

What should Helen do next?

Any questions? Contact us!

The case in question:

Assessing the situation:

Preparing a defence:

A happy ending?

What can we learn from this case?

Any other questions? Contact us!

The case in question:

What happened next?

What claims did Choi bring against Park?

The results:

What can we learn from this subletting case?

What else could Mr Choi do if he was unable to recover his losses from Mr Park?

How to correctly contract a sublet?

Any other issues? Contact us!

Details of the case:

Cash as a percentage of total income:

Lisa’s Law to the rescue:

What we argued:

Deliberate or simply unaware?

Success

What can we learn from this case?

Contact us!

Are the objectives met?

Is there a minimum salary requirement for the sole representative?

Who can be the so-called dependents of a Sole Representative applicant in the UK?

Is there possibility for an extension of a Sole Representative Visa after the initial application within the UK?

Can a Sole Representative applicant apply for the Indefinite Leave to Remain?

What are the DO’s and the DON’T’S under the sole representative visa?

Contact us!

The case in question:

The 10 year wait:

What occurred?

Proof and circumstances:

All-important DNA test

Success!

What can we learn from this case?

Contact us!

Subscribe to our newsletter