- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Preference Share
A preference share is a class of company share carrying preferential rights over ordinary shares.
These rights commonly include priority in receiving dividends and repayment of capital on winding-up.
Preference shareholders usually receive a fixed dividend.
However, they often have limited or no voting rights compared with ordinary shareholders.
Preference shares are commonly used as a financing mechanism in corporate structures.
A preference share is a class of company share carrying preferential rights over ordinary shares.
These rights commonly include priority in receiving dividends and repayment of capital on winding-up.
Preference shareholders usually receive a fixed dividend.
However, they often have limited or no voting rights compared with ordinary shareholders.
Preference shares are commonly used as a financing mechanism in corporate structures.
- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Preference
Preference has different meanings in insolvency law.
The law seeks to ensure fairness among creditors during insolvency proceedings.
Preference has different meanings in insolvency law.
- It may refer to favouring one creditor over others before bankruptcy or liquidation, for example by repaying one creditor in full while others remain unpaid.
- It may also refer to a floating charge created shortly before winding-up in favour of an existing creditor.
The law seeks to ensure fairness among creditors during insolvency proceedings.
- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Pre-emptive Right
A pre-emptive right is a right giving existing shareholders priority when certain shares are issued or transferred.
Under the Companies Act 2006, shareholders may have the right to be offered newly issued shares before those shares are offered to outsiders.
This protects shareholders from dilution of their ownership interests.
Pre-emptive rights may also arise under a company’s articles of association, particularly in private companies.
In that context, a shareholder wishing to transfer shares must first offer them to existing shareholders on specified terms.
Such rights are commonly used to preserve control within closely held companies.
A pre-emptive right is a right giving existing shareholders priority when certain shares are issued or transferred.
Under the Companies Act 2006, shareholders may have the right to be offered newly issued shares before those shares are offered to outsiders.
This protects shareholders from dilution of their ownership interests.
Pre-emptive rights may also arise under a company’s articles of association, particularly in private companies.
In that context, a shareholder wishing to transfer shares must first offer them to existing shareholders on specified terms.
Such rights are commonly used to preserve control within closely held companies.
- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Pre-emption
Pre-emption is a right of first refusal to purchase property if the owner later decides to sell it.
Unlike an option to purchase, a right of pre-emption does not compel the owner to sell the property.
Instead, it prevents the owner from selling to another person without first offering it to the holder of the pre-emption right on agreed terms.
The right must be drafted with sufficient certainty to be legally valid.
In registered land, rights of pre-emption created after 13 October 2003 may be protected by registration as a restriction on the proprietorship register.
Pre-emption rights are commonly used in property transactions, shareholder agreements, and commercial arrangements.
Pre-emption is a right of first refusal to purchase property if the owner later decides to sell it.
Unlike an option to purchase, a right of pre-emption does not compel the owner to sell the property.
Instead, it prevents the owner from selling to another person without first offering it to the holder of the pre-emption right on agreed terms.
The right must be drafted with sufficient certainty to be legally valid.
In registered land, rights of pre-emption created after 13 October 2003 may be protected by registration as a restriction on the proprietorship register.
Pre-emption rights are commonly used in property transactions, shareholder agreements, and commercial arrangements.
- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Pre-employment Health Questionnaires
Pre-employment health questionnaires are health or disability-related questions asked by employers during recruitment.
Under the Equality Act 2010, employers are generally prohibited from asking applicants about health or disability before making a job offer.
The rule aims to prevent discrimination against disabled applicants at an early stage of recruitment.
Certain exceptions apply, including questions about:
Enforcement is primarily carried out by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
Pre-employment health questionnaires are health or disability-related questions asked by employers during recruitment.
Under the Equality Act 2010, employers are generally prohibited from asking applicants about health or disability before making a job offer.
The rule aims to prevent discrimination against disabled applicants at an early stage of recruitment.
Certain exceptions apply, including questions about:
- reasonable adjustments needed for interviews or assessments;
- the ability to perform essential job functions;
- workforce monitoring;
- occupational requirements; and
- positive action schemes benefiting disabled persons.
Enforcement is primarily carried out by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Presiding Judge
A presiding judge is a puisne judge appointed by the Lord Chancellor to supervise and coordinate judicial work within a particular circuit under the English circuit system. The circuit system divides England and Wales into geographical regions for the administration of courts and judicial business. Each circuit generally has two presiding judges responsible for overseeing the operation of courts, allocation of judicial resources, and management of case administration. The South-Eastern Circuit is treated differently because it includes the Lord Chief Justice together with two puisne judges. There is also a Senior Presiding Judge for England and Wales who provides national leadership and coordination across all circuits.
The responsibilities of presiding judges extend beyond hearing cases in court. They help ensure the efficient administration of justice by supervising case management, supporting judges within their circuit, and liaising with court staff and legal professionals. Presiding judges may also provide guidance on judicial practice, workload distribution, and procedural improvements within their region. Their role is therefore both judicial and administrative in nature. By maintaining oversight of the courts within a circuit, they contribute to consistency, efficiency, and proper functioning of the justice system. The office reflects the broader principle that modern courts require organized judicial management as well as adjudication of disputes.
A presiding judge is a puisne judge appointed by the Lord Chancellor to supervise and coordinate judicial work within a particular circuit under the English circuit system. The circuit system divides England and Wales into geographical regions for the administration of courts and judicial business. Each circuit generally has two presiding judges responsible for overseeing the operation of courts, allocation of judicial resources, and management of case administration. The South-Eastern Circuit is treated differently because it includes the Lord Chief Justice together with two puisne judges. There is also a Senior Presiding Judge for England and Wales who provides national leadership and coordination across all circuits.
The responsibilities of presiding judges extend beyond hearing cases in court. They help ensure the efficient administration of justice by supervising case management, supporting judges within their circuit, and liaising with court staff and legal professionals. Presiding judges may also provide guidance on judicial practice, workload distribution, and procedural improvements within their region. Their role is therefore both judicial and administrative in nature. By maintaining oversight of the courts within a circuit, they contribute to consistency, efficiency, and proper functioning of the justice system. The office reflects the broader principle that modern courts require organized judicial management as well as adjudication of disputes.
- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Preserved County
A preserved county is a county that continues to exist for specific legal or ceremonial purposes even though it no longer functions as an active local government area following local government reorganization. In the United Kingdom, various reforms altered administrative boundaries and abolished certain counties for ordinary local government administration. However, some counties were retained for limited purposes such as licensing, ceremonial functions, or judicial administration. These retained entities became known as preserved counties. The concept ensures continuity and stability in areas of law and administration where historical county structures remained useful or symbolically important. Preserved counties therefore demonstrate how legal geography can continue to exist even after administrative structures have changed.
The distinction between preserved counties and administrative counties became particularly significant after major local government reforms in the twentieth century. While local councils and governmental responsibilities were reorganized into new administrative units, older county identities were often maintained for practical and ceremonial reasons. Certain statutes, regulations, and legal processes continued to refer to traditional county boundaries, making it necessary to preserve those areas for defined legal functions. Licensing legislation is one example where preserved counties retained importance. In addition, ceremonial matters such as the appointment of Lord-Lieutenants and High Sheriffs often continued according to preserved county boundaries. This approach balanced administrative modernization with historical continuity and public identity.
A preserved county is a county that continues to exist for specific legal or ceremonial purposes even though it no longer functions as an active local government area following local government reorganization. In the United Kingdom, various reforms altered administrative boundaries and abolished certain counties for ordinary local government administration. However, some counties were retained for limited purposes such as licensing, ceremonial functions, or judicial administration. These retained entities became known as preserved counties. The concept ensures continuity and stability in areas of law and administration where historical county structures remained useful or symbolically important. Preserved counties therefore demonstrate how legal geography can continue to exist even after administrative structures have changed.
The distinction between preserved counties and administrative counties became particularly significant after major local government reforms in the twentieth century. While local councils and governmental responsibilities were reorganized into new administrative units, older county identities were often maintained for practical and ceremonial reasons. Certain statutes, regulations, and legal processes continued to refer to traditional county boundaries, making it necessary to preserve those areas for defined legal functions. Licensing legislation is one example where preserved counties retained importance. In addition, ceremonial matters such as the appointment of Lord-Lieutenants and High Sheriffs often continued according to preserved county boundaries. This approach balanced administrative modernization with historical continuity and public identity.
- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Presents
The term presents is a traditional word commonly found in formal legal documents, especially deeds. Historically, it appears in expressions such as “Know all men by these presents,” which served as a formal introduction announcing that the document constituted a legally binding instrument. In legal drafting, the word “presents” refers to the document itself rather than gifts or offerings in the ordinary sense of the word. The term originates from older forms of legal English and Norman-French influenced drafting practices that emphasized ceremony and formality in written instruments. Although modern drafting styles have become simpler and more direct, the term still occasionally appears in older deeds and precedents. Today, its practical importance lies mainly in understanding historical legal documents and traditional conveyancing language.
The term presents is a traditional word commonly found in formal legal documents, especially deeds. Historically, it appears in expressions such as “Know all men by these presents,” which served as a formal introduction announcing that the document constituted a legally binding instrument. In legal drafting, the word “presents” refers to the document itself rather than gifts or offerings in the ordinary sense of the word. The term originates from older forms of legal English and Norman-French influenced drafting practices that emphasized ceremony and formality in written instruments. Although modern drafting styles have become simpler and more direct, the term still occasionally appears in older deeds and precedents. Today, its practical importance lies mainly in understanding historical legal documents and traditional conveyancing language.
- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Presence
In the law relating to wills, the term presence refers to an important legal requirement governing the valid execution of a will under the Wills Act 1837. Section 9 of the Act requires several acts connected with signing and witnessing a will to occur in the “presence” of the relevant parties. Where another person signs the will on behalf of the testator, that person must do so in the testator’s presence and at the testator’s direction. The testator must also sign or acknowledge the signature in the presence of at least two witnesses, and those witnesses must themselves sign or acknowledge their signatures in the presence of the testator. Additionally, the witnesses must be present together when witnessing the execution. These formalities exist to reduce fraud, ensure authenticity, and confirm that the testator genuinely intended the document to operate as a valid will.
The courts have interpreted the requirement of presence through case law over many years. Traditionally, the law required not merely physical proximity but also the opportunity to observe the act being carried out. The courts developed the principle that a person is “present” if he or she has the opportunity of seeing the relevant act and is mentally conscious of what is taking place. A leading authority is Brown v Skirrow, where the court emphasized that presence depends upon the ability to perceive the act if attention were directed toward it. Thus, someone in the same room but unable to see the signing because of physical barriers or incapacity may fail the requirement. Conversely, a person need not actually watch the signature being written if he had the opportunity to do so and remained aware of the event occurring. This interpretation reflects the balance between strict legal formalities and practical realities in executing wills.
Before 2020, legal debate existed over whether the requirement of presence demanded actual bodily presence in the same physical location. Advances in technology raised questions about whether witnessing through video communication could satisfy statutory requirements. The issue became especially significant during the global coronavirus pandemic, when restrictions on physical contact and social distancing measures made traditional witnessing difficult. In response, the government introduced the Wills Act 1837 (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Order 2020. This temporary amendment provided that, for wills executed on or after 31 January 2020 and initially before 31 January 2022, “presence” could include presence through videoconference or other visual transmission technology. The amendment applied to most section 9 witnessing requirements, though not to a person signing at the testator’s direction.
The temporary reform allowing remote witnessing represented a major development in succession law because the law of wills has historically insisted upon strict formal compliance. By recognizing virtual presence, the legislation adapted long-standing legal principles to extraordinary public health circumstances. However, the law still required real-time visual communication so that the parties could observe one another signing or acknowledging signatures. Audio communication alone would not satisfy the statutory requirement because visual observation remained central to preventing fraud or undue influence. Even under remote witnessing arrangements, practical difficulties could still arise, particularly where documents needed to be physically transferred between parties for signature. Consequently, legal professionals generally continued to recommend physical witnessing whenever safely possible, reserving remote witnessing for exceptional situations.
The concept of presence therefore illustrates the importance of procedural safeguards in the law of wills. The formal witnessing requirements protect vulnerable testators, reduce disputes about authenticity, and strengthen confidence in testamentary documents. Courts continue to treat these formalities seriously because mistakes in execution may render an otherwise valid will ineffective. The temporary expansion of the concept through electronic communication also demonstrates how legal systems can adapt traditional doctrines to changing technological and social conditions while still preserving the fundamental objectives of certainty and protection against fraud. Presence in succession law is therefore not merely a matter of physical location but a legal mechanism ensuring transparency, authenticity, and reliability in the making of wills.
In the law relating to wills, the term presence refers to an important legal requirement governing the valid execution of a will under the Wills Act 1837. Section 9 of the Act requires several acts connected with signing and witnessing a will to occur in the “presence” of the relevant parties. Where another person signs the will on behalf of the testator, that person must do so in the testator’s presence and at the testator’s direction. The testator must also sign or acknowledge the signature in the presence of at least two witnesses, and those witnesses must themselves sign or acknowledge their signatures in the presence of the testator. Additionally, the witnesses must be present together when witnessing the execution. These formalities exist to reduce fraud, ensure authenticity, and confirm that the testator genuinely intended the document to operate as a valid will.
The courts have interpreted the requirement of presence through case law over many years. Traditionally, the law required not merely physical proximity but also the opportunity to observe the act being carried out. The courts developed the principle that a person is “present” if he or she has the opportunity of seeing the relevant act and is mentally conscious of what is taking place. A leading authority is Brown v Skirrow, where the court emphasized that presence depends upon the ability to perceive the act if attention were directed toward it. Thus, someone in the same room but unable to see the signing because of physical barriers or incapacity may fail the requirement. Conversely, a person need not actually watch the signature being written if he had the opportunity to do so and remained aware of the event occurring. This interpretation reflects the balance between strict legal formalities and practical realities in executing wills.
Before 2020, legal debate existed over whether the requirement of presence demanded actual bodily presence in the same physical location. Advances in technology raised questions about whether witnessing through video communication could satisfy statutory requirements. The issue became especially significant during the global coronavirus pandemic, when restrictions on physical contact and social distancing measures made traditional witnessing difficult. In response, the government introduced the Wills Act 1837 (Electronic Communications) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Order 2020. This temporary amendment provided that, for wills executed on or after 31 January 2020 and initially before 31 January 2022, “presence” could include presence through videoconference or other visual transmission technology. The amendment applied to most section 9 witnessing requirements, though not to a person signing at the testator’s direction.
The temporary reform allowing remote witnessing represented a major development in succession law because the law of wills has historically insisted upon strict formal compliance. By recognizing virtual presence, the legislation adapted long-standing legal principles to extraordinary public health circumstances. However, the law still required real-time visual communication so that the parties could observe one another signing or acknowledging signatures. Audio communication alone would not satisfy the statutory requirement because visual observation remained central to preventing fraud or undue influence. Even under remote witnessing arrangements, practical difficulties could still arise, particularly where documents needed to be physically transferred between parties for signature. Consequently, legal professionals generally continued to recommend physical witnessing whenever safely possible, reserving remote witnessing for exceptional situations.
The concept of presence therefore illustrates the importance of procedural safeguards in the law of wills. The formal witnessing requirements protect vulnerable testators, reduce disputes about authenticity, and strengthen confidence in testamentary documents. Courts continue to treat these formalities seriously because mistakes in execution may render an otherwise valid will ineffective. The temporary expansion of the concept through electronic communication also demonstrates how legal systems can adapt traditional doctrines to changing technological and social conditions while still preserving the fundamental objectives of certainty and protection against fraud. Presence in succession law is therefore not merely a matter of physical location but a legal mechanism ensuring transparency, authenticity, and reliability in the making of wills.
- Published on
KembaraXtra – Legal Terms – Prescription
The term prescription has important meanings in both land law and international law, though in each context it concerns the acquisition of rights through the passage of time and continued use or control. In land law, prescription refers to the acquisition of an easement or a profit à prendre through long and uninterrupted use over another person’s land. The land benefiting from the right is known as the dominant tenement, while the land burdened by the right is called the servient tenement. Prescription recognizes that where a right has been exercised openly and continuously for many years without objection, the law may formally recognize and protect that right. The doctrine therefore promotes certainty, stability, and fairness in property relations. It prevents disputes from arising after long periods during which landowners have accepted or tolerated the exercise of rights over land.
To establish a prescriptive right in land law, the claimant must prove that the use of the right was exercised openly, continuously, and without the permission of the servient owner. The use must not have been carried out secretly, by force, or under licence from the owner, because such circumstances would undermine the claim that the right existed independently. Under the Prescription Act 1832, most easements may be acquired after twenty years of uninterrupted use, although forty years’ use generally creates an absolute and indefeasible right. In the case of profits à prendre, the required periods are generally thirty and sixty years respectively. Rights to light enjoy special treatment, as twenty years’ uninterrupted enjoyment may establish an absolute easement of light. These statutory provisions simplified earlier common law rules and made it easier for long-established rights to be legally recognized.
In addition to the statutory system, rights may also arise under the common law doctrine known as the doctrine of lost modern grant. Under this doctrine, if a claimant proves at least twenty years of uninterrupted use, the court may presume that a lawful grant of the right was once made but has since been lost. This legal fiction developed because proving continuous use since “time immemorial,” defined at common law as the year 1189, was practically impossible. The doctrine therefore allowed courts to recognize long-standing rights without requiring impossible historical proof. Common law prescription based on use since 1189 has become largely obsolete in modern practice because of these more practical alternatives. Nevertheless, the historical development of prescription demonstrates how the law evolved to balance strict legal ownership with practical realities of long-term land use.
In international law, prescription refers to the acquisition of sovereignty over territory through the continuous, peaceful, and uncontested exercise of state authority over a prolonged period. The principle operates where a state effectively administers and controls territory while other states, including any previous sovereign, fail to challenge that authority. Prescription therefore depends heavily upon acquiescence, neglect, or abandonment by the prior sovereign authority. Circumstances supporting prescription may include failure to occupy or administer the territory, abandonment, wrongful original claims, or failure to contest the authority of another state exercising control. The doctrine recognizes that long-term effective governance can eventually establish lawful sovereignty even where historical claims may once have been disputed.
An important illustration of prescription in international law is the Island of Palmas Arbitration, where the tribunal emphasized that continuous and peaceful exercise of state authority is strong evidence of sovereignty. In that dispute, the tribunal concluded that the Netherlands had exercised effective and uncontested sovereignty over the island for more than two centuries, thereby supporting its legal claim. The principle demonstrates that international law often values stability, effective administration, and peaceful control over purely historical assertions of title. Prescription in both land law and international law therefore reflects the broader legal principle that long and uncontested exercise of rights or authority may eventually mature into legally recognized entitlement. Whether applied to private property rights or territorial sovereignty, prescription promotes certainty, stability, and orderly legal relations through recognition of established practice over time.
The term prescription has important meanings in both land law and international law, though in each context it concerns the acquisition of rights through the passage of time and continued use or control. In land law, prescription refers to the acquisition of an easement or a profit à prendre through long and uninterrupted use over another person’s land. The land benefiting from the right is known as the dominant tenement, while the land burdened by the right is called the servient tenement. Prescription recognizes that where a right has been exercised openly and continuously for many years without objection, the law may formally recognize and protect that right. The doctrine therefore promotes certainty, stability, and fairness in property relations. It prevents disputes from arising after long periods during which landowners have accepted or tolerated the exercise of rights over land.
To establish a prescriptive right in land law, the claimant must prove that the use of the right was exercised openly, continuously, and without the permission of the servient owner. The use must not have been carried out secretly, by force, or under licence from the owner, because such circumstances would undermine the claim that the right existed independently. Under the Prescription Act 1832, most easements may be acquired after twenty years of uninterrupted use, although forty years’ use generally creates an absolute and indefeasible right. In the case of profits à prendre, the required periods are generally thirty and sixty years respectively. Rights to light enjoy special treatment, as twenty years’ uninterrupted enjoyment may establish an absolute easement of light. These statutory provisions simplified earlier common law rules and made it easier for long-established rights to be legally recognized.
In addition to the statutory system, rights may also arise under the common law doctrine known as the doctrine of lost modern grant. Under this doctrine, if a claimant proves at least twenty years of uninterrupted use, the court may presume that a lawful grant of the right was once made but has since been lost. This legal fiction developed because proving continuous use since “time immemorial,” defined at common law as the year 1189, was practically impossible. The doctrine therefore allowed courts to recognize long-standing rights without requiring impossible historical proof. Common law prescription based on use since 1189 has become largely obsolete in modern practice because of these more practical alternatives. Nevertheless, the historical development of prescription demonstrates how the law evolved to balance strict legal ownership with practical realities of long-term land use.
In international law, prescription refers to the acquisition of sovereignty over territory through the continuous, peaceful, and uncontested exercise of state authority over a prolonged period. The principle operates where a state effectively administers and controls territory while other states, including any previous sovereign, fail to challenge that authority. Prescription therefore depends heavily upon acquiescence, neglect, or abandonment by the prior sovereign authority. Circumstances supporting prescription may include failure to occupy or administer the territory, abandonment, wrongful original claims, or failure to contest the authority of another state exercising control. The doctrine recognizes that long-term effective governance can eventually establish lawful sovereignty even where historical claims may once have been disputed.
An important illustration of prescription in international law is the Island of Palmas Arbitration, where the tribunal emphasized that continuous and peaceful exercise of state authority is strong evidence of sovereignty. In that dispute, the tribunal concluded that the Netherlands had exercised effective and uncontested sovereignty over the island for more than two centuries, thereby supporting its legal claim. The principle demonstrates that international law often values stability, effective administration, and peaceful control over purely historical assertions of title. Prescription in both land law and international law therefore reflects the broader legal principle that long and uncontested exercise of rights or authority may eventually mature into legally recognized entitlement. Whether applied to private property rights or territorial sovereignty, prescription promotes certainty, stability, and orderly legal relations through recognition of established practice over time.