header-logo header-logo

Yours virtually...

06 May 2010 / Alison Bull
Issue: 7416 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Alison Bull reports on the use of virtual signings & closings in the family courts

The decision in Mercury v HMRC (2008) (R (on the application of Mercury Tax Group Ltd and another) v HMRC and others [2008] EWHC 2721 (Admin), [2008] All ER (D) 129 (Nov)) has generated academic debate around virtual signings or closings in a commercial context, and guidance from various interested parties, including the Law Society Company Law Committee.
This article considers the relevance of this in respect of the execution of documents in a family law context.

When does the issue arise?

It can arise in a family law context in relation to the following documents:
(i) Sworn statements; eg Forms E, special procedure affidavits, s 25 statements.
(ii) Unsworn statements; eg Children Act or CPR witness statements.
(iii) Deeds; such as pre- or post-marital agreements (PMAs) and cohabitation contracts.
(iv) “Simple” contracts (not involving dispositions of land).

Mercury v HMRC

Until the High Court decision in Mercury v HMRC, signature pages of documents were often signed in advance to be transferred to the engrossed final

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll