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 found Sophie Fleming in contempt for breaching anti-harassment injunctions by failing to remove and continuing to publish posts alleging fraud and misconduct.
The dominant purpose for making the traffic orders permanent was to safeguard revenue, which is not an authorised purpose under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984; therefore, the orders are unlawful and must be quashed.
Source excerpt
Lawrence, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Croydon [2026] EWHC 483 (Admin) (04 March 2026)
The High Court quashed Croydon’s traffic orders, holding they were made for the unlawful purpose of raising revenue and rejecting a late service-based jurisdiction challenge.
The Claimant failed to show a good reason for extending time for service of the claim form. The extension would deprive the Defendant of an arguable limitation defence, and there was material non-disclosure by the Claimant regarding the limitation issue. The extension of time is set aside, and the court has no jurisdiction to try the claim.
Source excerpt
Lloyds Developments Ltd v Accor S.A [2026] EWHC 232 (TCC) (13 February 2026)
The High Court set aside an extension of time for service, holding the claimant had not shown a good reason and had failed to disclose a live limitation issue.
High Tech Construction Ltd v WLP Trading and Marketing Ltd [2026] EWHC 152 (TCC) (30 January 2026)
The High Court refused summary enforcement of an adjudicator’s decision where WLP had a real prospect of proving the alleged JCT contract never existed and fraud was in issue.
The court refused summary enforcement of an adjudicator’s award after finding a real prospect that the alleged JCT contract did not exist, creating a jurisdictional issue.
Mr. Hill, having filed an acknowledgment of service and not applying under CPR 11(1) within 14 days, is deemed to have accepted the court's jurisdiction. Even if this were not the case, substituted service was validly effected on him under Florida law. There is no limitation defence available to Mr. Hill on the current pleadings, and his application to set aside the extension of time would have failed on the merits.
Source excerpt
Bellway Homes Ltd v The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House [2025] EWCA Civ 1347 (23 October 2025)
The Court of Appeal held that late or defective service of a claim form did not require the defendant to file an acknowledgment of service or Part 11 application.
Northfield Property Solutions Ltd v Dykes & Anor [2025] EWHC 2926 (TCC) (14 October 2025)
The High Court refused time extension for an arbitration challenge, finding the delay unexplained and the proposed section 68 challenge intrinsically weak.
Explore more
