"The forms and precedents section is essential so that I can quickly and easily look up provisions to include in templates or bespoke project contracts."
RWE
Access all documents on Estoppel
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.
For our full legal glossary and more legal research sources, register for a free Lexis+ trial
Drafting and negotiating an entire agreement clause—checklist This Checklist sets out key issues to consider, and provides practical guidance, when drafting and negotiating entire agreement clauses in a business-to-business (B2B) contract. It considers the implications of common law and statutory controls, including the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (UCTA 1977) and the Misrepresentation Act 1967 (MA 1967). The purpose of an entire agreement clause is to give the parties certainty that the entirety of the agreement between them is set out in writing and to ensure that any pre-contractual representations, statements, arrangements or discussions will not form part of the agreement they are entering into. Statements are often made by one party to another as part of the pre-contract negotiations (for example as part of a sales process). Disputes can arise around whether, or which, statements are intended to form part of the contract or potentially give rise to other remedies. Depending on the facts, a pre-contractual statement might take legal effect (and give rise to remedies). For more information, see Practice Note: Pre-contractual representations and statements....
Terminating distribution agreements—checklist This Checklist outlines some of the key considerations surrounding termination of distribution agreements including issues to consider when drafting a distribution agreement; prior to termination and when effecting the termination of the distribution agreement itself. For a Practice Note addressing these issues, see Practice Note: Terminating distribution agreements. For precedent distribution agreements in a UK-to-UK context, see Precedents: • Distribution agreement—exclusive—long form • Distribution agreement—exclusive—short form • Distribution agreement—non-exclusive—long form • Distribution agreement—non-exclusive—short form • Selective distribution agreement—non-exclusive For precedent distribution agreements in a UK-to-EEA context, see Precedents: • Distribution agreement—exclusive (EEA territory) • Distribution agreement—non-exclusive (EEA territory) • Selective distribution agreement—non-exclusive (EEA territory) For a precedent letter to terminate a distribution agreement, see Precedents: • Termination letter—manufacturer to distributor • Termination letter—distributor to manufacturer For a summary of information to consider when appointing a distributor, see: • Appointing a distributor in the UK—checklist • Appointing a distributor abroad—checklist For information on distribution agreements generally, see Practice Notes: • Nature and types of distributorship •...
Discover our 7 Checklists on Estoppel
US—patents fundamentals—the America Invents Act This Practice Note was originally written for Lexis Practice Advisor®, in the US. This Practice Note provides an introduction to the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), which is the first major overhaul of the US patent system since the Patent Act of 1952. It converts the US patent system from a first-to-invent to a first-to-file system for patents with an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013. A first-to-file system awards the patent to the inventor who first files the application, as opposed to the inventor who first reduces the invention to practice. This encourages prompt application filings and in most cases eliminates the need to resolve disputes as to who is the first inventor. Moving to a first-to-file system also harmonizes the US patent system with foreign patent systems, which are nearly all first-to-file. In addition to switching to the first-to-file system, the AIA also: • expanded the procedures available in the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for patent...
Jurisdiction agreements—exclusive jurisdiction agreements This Practice Note considers exclusive jurisdiction agreements (also known as choice of court agreements). Specific considerations as to the construction, effect and enforcement of this type of jurisdiction agreements are discussed. For guidance on: • non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses, see Practice Note: Jurisdiction agreements—non-exclusive jurisdiction agreements • asymmetric jurisdiction clauses, see Practice Note: Jurisdiction agreements—asymmetric jurisdiction agreements What is an exclusive jurisdiction clause? An exclusive jurisdiction clause or agreement, provides for the courts in a specified jurisdiction to hear disputes between the parties; it creates a contractual right not to be sued elsewhere. A number of exclusive jurisdiction clauses also include forum non conveniens waivers, ie the parties irrevocably waiver any right to bringing proceedings in a jurisdiction other than that stipulated in the jurisdiction clause. Exclusive jurisdiction clauses differ from non-exclusive jurisdiction clauses in that they exclude the rights of the parties to commence proceedings in a different jurisdiction to that provided for in the jurisdiction clause. For example exclusive jurisdiction clauses, see Practice...
Discover our 135 Practice Notes on Estoppel
Agreement to extend limitation—standstill agreement This Agreement is dated [insert day] of [insert month] 20[insert year] Parties 1 [Insert full name and address of individual or company name, number and address of registered office] (Party A) 2 [Insert full name and address of individual or company name, number and address of registered office] (Party B) each a ‘Party’ and together the ‘Parties’ The parties agree: 1 Definitions and interpretation Dispute • means any claim arising out of or connected with [Insert description of the dispute/circumstances giving rise to the dispute]. Proceedings • means court proceedings in England and Wales and any arbitration in relation to the Dispute. Period of Extension • means the period which begins on the date of this Agreement and continues until it is terminated in accordance with clause 3. Extension Date • means the date on which the Period of Extension ends, in accordance with clause 3. 1.1 Save where the context otherwise requires, in this Agreement: 1.1.1 words in the singular include the...
Cohabitant claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996—client guide This document provides general guidance regarding the property rights of cohabitants and claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996. Your family lawyer will be able to provide specific advice based on your circumstances. Who can apply? Cohabitants do not have the same rights to make property claims as married couples or civil partners. Instead, disputes between cohabitants regarding their interests in a property are determined in accordance with the law of trusts. The 'common law' wife or husband does not exist in law, and claims by cohabitants are very limited in comparison with spouses or civil partners. In some circumstances it may be possible to make a claim on behalf of a child (see: Financial arrangements for children—client guide). There are two main ways in which a cohabitant may have an interest in a property: • as a joint owner, or • where the property is in the...
Dive into our 6 Precedents related to Estoppel
Where a document forms a schedule to an agreement, if the document in the schedule is signed rather than being printed as a separate agreement and then signed, is it a valid execution of that document? This question envisages a written agreement, which contains, in a schedule, the form of a further agreement, which the parties may sign on some future occasion. When that occasion arises, the parties simply sign the schedule, rather than printing out a new document in the form of the schedule and then signing it. This question is whether that will constitute a binding contract when executed in such circumstances. The general principle at common law is that a contract can be made quite informally and no writing or other form is necessary. This basic rule is subject to statute, which may require a particular form of contract, eg in writing and/or other formalities. The most obvious examples are contracts for the sale of land (section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989) and guarantees...
Can a party to a general commercial contract accept a notice terminating for convenience which has not been served in accordance with the requirements of the contract and will such acceptance result in the contract terminating on the date set out in the notice? This Q&A assumes that the question relates to a business-to-business contract. A contract may be brought to an end in a number of different ways. For more information, see Practice Note: Termination and expiry of contracts. Where an agreement includes a right to terminate for convenience, to avoid arguments as to the effectiveness of the exercise of such right, close attention should be paid to the requirements of the agreement including any notices clause. The courts generally require strict compliance with the requirements of notice clauses. The effectiveness and consequences of a purported exercise of a right to terminate for convenience will depend on the construction of the agreement as a whole and the surrounding factual context. The courts have found a number of termination notices...
See the 183 Q&As about Estoppel
This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes: analysis of a number of key DR developments and key judicial decisions including the Civil Procedure Rule Committee minutes of 9 May 2025 and the Court of Appeal decision in Saxon Woods Investments Ltd v Costa (corporate disputes); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.
This week's edition of Property Disputes weekly highlights includes an analysis of a case where the Technology and Construction Court clarified the limits of recoverable loss claims for damages under the Defective Premises Act 1972, an Upper Tribunal decision overturning a remediation order citing procedural irregularities, a Court of Appeal decision on whether secured debts incurred prior to a debt moratorium are excluded, and a High Court decision dismissing a beneficial interest claim in a civil recording and possession claim under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
Read the latest 141 News articles on Estoppel
**Trials are provided to all ÑÇÖÞÉ«ÇéÍø content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these ÑÇÖÞÉ«ÇéÍø services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
0330 161 1234