Your Rights and the UK Police:

When stopped by police in the UK, your rights include

  • the right to remain silent, request a record of the stop and search, ask for a copy of the search record, and the right to legal advice if arrested. You are also not obligated to give your name and address unless the police suspect you of an offense.
  • Here’s a more detailed breakdown of your rights:
  • Stop and Question:  You can walk away and refuse to answer questions if you are not being detained for a search, says Toynbee Hall.
  • You do not have to stop if you are not being asked to stop, says GOV.UK.
  • Stop and Search: Right to know the reason: The police must explain the reasons for their suspicion and what they are searching for.

Is an Invoice required?

In the United Kingdom, the requirement for a company to issue a properly formatted invoice, particularly for VAT purposes, is primarily governed by the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (VATA 1994). This Act, along with secondary legislation such as the Value Added Tax Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/2518), specifies the rules for issuing invoices, especially for VAT-registered businesses.

Relevant Legislation and Section

The Value Added Tax Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/2518), made under the authority of the Value Added Tax Act 1994, contain the detailed requirements for invoices. Specifically, Regulation 13 of the VAT Regulations 1995 outlines the obligation to provide a VAT invoice and the information it must contain.

Here is the relevant quote from Regulation 13(1) of the Value Added Tax Regulations 1995:

“Subject to paragraph (2) below, where a registered person makes a taxable supply in the United Kingdom to a taxable person, or receives a payment on account in respect of a supply he has made or intends to make to a taxable person, he shall, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Commissioners, provide that person with a VAT invoice within 30 days of the time when the supply is treated as taking place under section 6 of the Act or, in the case of a payment on account, within 30 days of the receipt of the payment.”

This regulation mandates that a VAT-registered business must issue a VAT invoice for taxable supplies made to another taxable person within 30 days of the supply or payment. The invoice must meet specific formatting and content requirements as outlined in Regulation 14 of the same regulations.

Key Invoice Requirements (Regulation 14)

Regulation 14(1) of the VAT Regulations 1995 specifies the particulars that a VAT invoice must include:

“A VAT invoice shall contain the following particulars—
(a) a sequential number based on one or more series which uniquely identifies the document,
(b) the time of the supply,
(c) the date of issue of the document,
(d) the name, address and registration number of the supplier,
(e) the name and address of the person to whom the goods or services are supplied,
(f) a description sufficient to identify the goods or services supplied,
(g) for each description, the quantity of the goods or the extent of the services, and the rate of VAT and the amount payable, excluding VAT, expressed in any currency,
(h) the gross total amount payable, excluding VAT, expressed in any currency,
(i) the rate of any discount offered,
(j) the total amount of VAT chargeable, expressed in sterling,
(k) the unit price,
(l) where a supply is a supply to which regulation 93 applies, a reference to the appropriate provision of the VAT Act or any indication that the supply is one to which that provision applies,
(m) where a supply is a supply to which regulation 94 applies, a reference to the appropriate provision of the VAT Act or any indication that the supply is one to which that provision applies,
(n) where the customer is liable to account for the VAT, a reference to the appropriate provision of the VAT Act or any indication that the supply is one to which that provision applies.”

Additional Notes

  • The Value Added Tax Act 1994, particularly Section 6, defines when a supply is treated as taking place, which is relevant for the timing of issuing invoices.
  • For limited companies, additional requirements may apply, such as including the full company name as it appears on the certificate of incorporation (per the Companies Act 2006, Section 82, for business stationery, though this is not specific to invoices).
  • If the company is not VAT-registered, the requirements are less stringent, but invoices must still include basic details like the company name, address, and a unique invoice number, as per general commercial practice and HMRC guidelines.
  • For simplified VAT invoices (for supplies under £250, including VAT), fewer details are required, as per Regulation 16 of the VAT Regulations 1995.

Summary

The Value Added Tax Regulations 1995, specifically Regulation 13, mandates that VAT-registered businesses issue properly formatted VAT invoices for taxable supplies, with detailed requirements outlined in Regulation 14. These regulations stem from the authority of the Value Added Tax Act 1994. For non-VAT registered businesses, there is no strict legal requirement to issue invoices, but doing so with specific details is standard practice to ensure compliance and facilitate payment. Just remember, ALL presentments for payment sent by any government agency, are not a valid invoice, as required by the law. When they send you a presentment, they are claiming you owe them money without any legal justification for doing so. Always challenge their claims.

Legal Cases

  1. Jackson v Murphy (1887) 4 T.L.R. 92—

a case frequently cited regarding how promissory notes and bills of exchange are treated under UK law. While contemporaneous case law databases may not provide a full text for this 1887 decision, reliable secondary sources clarify its principle and outcome.

What the Case Established

  • The ruling confirmed that a bill of exchange or promissory note, when properly tendered, must be treated as payment in cash, not merely as a right to litigate a debt. In essence, the note itself discharges the obligation like cash would. New York State Unified Court System+14What Do They Know+14Scribd+14JustAnswer+4Scribd+4What Do They Know+4.
  • In particular, it affirmed that if a promissory note or cheque is tendered and accepted, any cross‑claim or counterclaim by the defendant must first be addressed—meaning they must pay the instrument and litigate separately if necessary Kenya Law.

Summary of the Outcome

  • A properly tendered promissory note (or bill of exchange) discharges the debt just as cash does.
  • Cross‑claims or counterclaims cannot be set off at the time of tender; the holder must first pay, and only later may they pursue other legal remedies Facebook+10Scribd+10What Do They Know+10Kenya Law.

This principle remains foundational: negotiable instruments like these are treated as equivalent to cash, streamlining settlement and minimizing complexity in transactions.

Example in Later Cases

The principle from Jackson v Murphy has been reaffirmed in later cases, including by Lord Denning in Fielding & Platt Ltd v Selim Najjar (1969), where he emphasized:

“A bill of exchange or a promissory note is to be treated as cash. It is to be honoured unless there is some good reason to the contrary.” Facebook+13What Do They Know+13What Do They Know+13.

Final Takeaway

Jackson v Murphy (1887) 4 T.L.R. 92 ruled that a tendered promissory note or bill of exchange:

  • Is regarded and accepted as payment in full (i.e., treated as cash),
  • And cannot be held up by counterclaims; those must be handled separately after the instrument has been paid out.



2) Nova (Jersey) Knit Ltd v Kammgarn Spinnerei GmbH [1977] 1 WLR 713 (House of Lords)

House of Lords Decision

  • Outcome: Kammgarn succeeded. Nova was required to honour the cheques.
  • Principle established:
    • A cheque is to be treated as cash.
    • When a cheque (or by analogy, a bill of exchange or promissory note) is tendered, the drawer/acceptor cannot rely on cross-claims relating to the underlying contract as a defence.



Key Statements

  • Lord Diplock (endorsing the “cash rule”):
  • “A cheque is to be treated as the equivalent of cash. It is not open to the drawer, when sued upon it, to set up a cross-claim based upon the contract in respect of which the cheque was given.”

  • Lord Wilberforce
  • Lord Wilberforce emphasized the legal treatment of bills of exchange as deferred cash.
  • “Unliquidated cross‑claims cannot be relied upon by way of extinguishing set‑off against a claim on a bill of exchange … it is important in the interests of businessmen … that the negotiability of such bills be maintained so that they are ‘equivalent to cash.’”

  • This decision reaffirmed and strengthened the earlier approach seen in Jackson v Murphy (1887) and later repeated by Lord Denning in Fielding & Platt Ltd v Najjar (1969).

The House of Lords in Nova (Jersey) Knit v Kammgarn [1977] made it clear that a cheque (and by analogy, a bill of exchange or promissory note) must be treated as cash, and the drawer/acceptor cannot resist payment by alleging defects in the underlying transaction.

3) Without Recourse
is one of the most important special forms of endorsement under the Bills of Exchange Act 1882.

✅Liability may be expressly negatived by an express stipulation, such as by adding the words ‘without recourse’ or words to the like effect.”

🔹 So, by default, when you endorse a bill you guarantee payment if the acceptor dishonours.
🔹 But Section 16(1) expressly allows you to negate that liability with wording like “without recourse.”

🔹 What it means

  • Normally, when you endorse (sign) a bill and pass it on, you become liable as an indorser.
    • If the drawee/acceptor refuses to pay, the holder can sue you as well as prior parties (s.55 of the Act).
  • Endorsement “without recourse” changes this:
    • It excludes your liability as an indorser.
    • You are effectively saying: “I pass this bill to you, but if it is dishonoured, don’t come back to me.”

🔹 The legal basis

  • Section 16(1), Bills of Exchange Act 1882:

A person may exclude his liability by expressly writing words to that effect, such as “without recourse.”

So, it is a recognised statutory form of qualified endorsement.

🔹 How it is written

  • The indorser writes on the bill (usually on the back):
  • Pay to [Name] without recourse
  • [Signature]
  • This means you transfer your rights in the bill but not the obligation to pay if dishonoured.

🔹 Effects in practice

  1. The bill is still negotiable → the new holder can still enforce it against the acceptor, drawer, and other endorsers.
  2. You’re protected → if the bill bounces, you cannot be sued.
  3. Used in banking & trade → common when banks collect bills “for customer account,” or when a seller doesn’t want continuing liability once they’ve transferred the instrument.

🔹 Example

  • Alice (drawer) draws a bill on Bob (drawee/acceptor).
  • Alice endorses it to Carol.
  • Carol endorses it to Dan, but writes:
    “Pay Dan without recourse, Carol [signature].”
  • If Bob dishonours the bill, Dan can sue Alice or Bob, but not Carol, because she endorsed without recourse.

✅ In summary:
Endorsing a bill “without recourse” is a way to transfer the bill but disclaim liability as an indorser. It means you pass on the rights of payment but protect yourself from being sued if the bill is dishonoured.