Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The High Court continued and varied interim anti-suit and anti-enforcement injunctions restraining Russian proceedings said to breach arbitration agreements, and allowed alternative service.
The Commercial Court refused an anti-suit injunction, granted summary judgment for UniCredit S.p.A., and held it lacked jurisdiction over AO UniCredit Bank.
The court revoked the anti-suit injunctions and costs orders due to material changes in circumstances and ongoing obligations, but declined to revoke declarations as to jurisdiction and applicable law, as they reflect past determinations and their revocation would not alter the historical fact of the court's jurisdiction.
Source excerpt
Commercial Court judgment on EuroChem bond demands, EU sanctions, and assignment issues involving Société Générale and ING.
KLM failed to comply with the contractual 'Fresh 2' temperature control obligations, exposing the cargo to high ambient temperatures for extended periods during carriage by air, which constituted 'events' under Article 18(1) causing irreversible damage to the asparagus. The mesh wrapping was standard practice and did not cause or contribute to the damage. Article 18(2) exceptions (inherent vice, defective packing) were not established. KLM is strictly liable for the damage sustained.
Source excerpt
The claimants failed to establish a good arguable case that their claims against the first and second defendants fell within the jurisdictional gateway of CPR Part 6.33(2B), as neither defendant was party to a contract with the claimants containing an English jurisdiction clause. The amendment application was not sufficiently compelling to override procedural concerns and the requirement for security. Consequently, service and the claim form were set aside as against the first and second defendants, and the court declared it had no jurisdiction over them.
Source excerpt
The dispute forming the subject matter of the Italian proceedings falls within the scope of clause 24 of the SPA, not Article 8 of the Deed of Transfer. The Defendant breached the SPA by commencing proceedings in Italy, and there were no strong reasons to refuse an interim anti-suit injunction.
Source excerpt
Alliance Automotive Procurement Ltd v Auto Zatoka Spolka Z Ograniczona Odpowiedzialnoscia [2025] EWHC 1697 (Ch) (04 July 2025)
The High Court refused to strike out a claim or treat service as ineffective despite errors in the response pack, holding the defects were technical and non-prejudicial.
Interglobal, as consignee under the Bills of Lading, is bound by the MSC Terms including the exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the English courts and English law by operation of COGSA 1992. Nigerian law and forum non conveniens are irrelevant to the validity of the jurisdiction clause. There are no strong reasons to set aside the anti-suit injunction. The anti-anti-suit injunction is justified due to real risk of further proceedings in Nigeria interfering with the English proceedings. There was no failure to give full and frank disclosure.
Source excerpt
Unless there is a legitimate and substantiated objection to the forum, it does not constitute bad faith for a SEP owner to seek to force an implementer to accept determination of FRAND terms by the SEP holder’s preferred court rather than the implementer’s preferred court. The English court being first seised is not determinative. The declarations granted by the judge were set aside except for the jurisdictionally neutral declaration reflecting the parties’ agreement.
Source excerpt
Explore more
