header-logo header-logo

Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (Commencement No 8) Order 2012 (SI 2012/1312)

22 May 2012
Issue: 7514 / Categories: Legislation
printer mail-detail

The Order brings into force the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, ss 93, 94.


Summary

Purpose

Both provisions amend the Charging Orders Act 1979 (the 1979 Act).

What’s Changing?

Section 93 is brought into force on 1 October 2012. It amends the 1979 Act so that where a debtor is required by a county court or High Court order to pay a sum by instalments, a charging order may be made even though there has been no default in payment, but:

  • the court must take the fact there has been no default into account in deciding whether to make the order; and
  • an order for sale to enforce the charging order may in any event not be made where there has been no default in payment.

Section 94 is brought into force on 17

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

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll