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
Kiko UK Ltd v Jamino Ltd & Anor [2026] EWCA Civ 513 (30 April 2026)
The Court of Appeal held that disclaimer of a lease by an assignee’s liquidator was a “failure” under a parent company guarantee, triggering indemnity for new lease costs.
The Court of Appeal held that a lease disclaimer by the assignee was a “failure” under the guarantee, so the parent guarantor had to indemnify Kiko for new lease costs.
High Court property-sale dispute over off-plan flats: the seller’s completion notices failed because the furniture package was not sufficiently present, so termination was invalid and specific performance was ordered.
Real Assets (RA) Global Opportunity Fund I Ltd v Floreat Real Estate Ltd [2026] EWHC 576 (Comm) (12 March 2026)
The High Court construed a joint venture agreement over Springs Farm, holding that RAGOF could sell and market the property, and that FRE had no post-sale occupation right.
UK Global Healthcare Ltd v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2026] EWHC 561 (TCC) (12 March 2026)
Summary judgment and strike out were refused in a glove-supply dispute, with the court finding triable issues on prevention, waiver, estoppel, and contractual expiry.
Presbar Diecastings Ltd v GW Atkins & Sons Ltd & Anor [2026] EWHC 399 (Ch) (25 February 2026)
High Court Chancery Division judgment on an APA dispute: Presbar recovered the unpaid purchase price, while Shield’s principal order book and machinery warranty counterclaims mostly failed.
High Court dispute over an asset purchase agreement, focusing on order book warranties, the meaning of “new work,” and limited counterclaims for machinery and scrap metal.
The Imaging Centre Assets Ltd v Canon Medical Systems Ltd [2026] EWHC 311 (Ch) (13 February 2026)
The court refused summary judgment on liability in a contract dispute over orders for medical imaging units, holding that key issues over price, delivery and implied terms required trial.
The High Court refused summary judgment in a contract dispute over medical imaging equipment, holding that price, payment, delivery, and order terms required trial.
The claims raise triable issues of fact and law regarding the construction of the 1991 and 2001 agreements, the scope of any exclusive rights, and the existence of equitable duties; the evidence is insufficiently particularised for summary judgment, and the matter requires a full trial.
Source excerpt
Explore more
