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 dismissed a Part 8 claim seeking rescission of a land sale, holding the TR1 effective and the claimant had not proved forgery or invalidity.
Falloon v Khan & Anor [2026] EWHC 515 (Ch) (13 March 2026)
The High Court dismissed a claim seeking rescission of a land sale, holding the evidence showed a valid sale to Mr Khan and no basis to rectify the register.
GB Europe Management Services Ltd v RMH Asset GmbH [2026] EWHC 160 (Comm) (11 February 2026)
The High Court held that RMH Asset GmbH failed to prove economic duress in relation to a January 2023 facility agreement, and the claimant succeeded in debt recovery.
The High Court refused security for costs in a claim over a Picasso auction, finding the claim and counterclaim raised the same issues and that illiquid assets and undertakings did not justify security.
Candy Ventures SARL v Aaqua BV & Anor [2025] EWHC 2877 (Comm) (05 November 2025)
The High Court found Aaqua BV and Robert Bonnier liable for fraudulent misrepresentation to Candy Ventures SARL and awarded damages of ÂŁ4,623,919 plus interest.
The Defendant knowingly made false replies to pre-contract enquiries regarding moth infestation and related reports, inducing the Claimants to purchase the property. The Claimants relied on these misrepresentations through their agents. Rescission is the appropriate remedy, as counter restitution can be effected by return of the property and financial adjustments, and no bar of delay or affirmation applies. Damages for consequential losses are recoverable in addition to restitution.
Source excerpt
Capital Developments Waterloo Ltd v Mohiyuddin (Unilateral notice - agreement for lease -rescission for failure to complete) [2025] UKFTT 1077 (PC) (08 August 2025)
The tribunal granted removal of a unilateral notice after finding the respondent failed to complete an agreement for lease and the applicant validly rescinded it.
The tribunal granted removal of a unilateral notice after finding the respondent failed to complete and the applicant validly rescinded the agreement for lease.
The defendants' statutory right to recover property transferred under an unenforceable sale and rent back agreement binds successors in title and constitutes a mere equity protected by actual occupation under the Land Registration Act; the claimant did not carry on regulated activities by way of business, but the right to recover property is not defeated by transfer to a third party.
Source excerpt
The court valued shares in a shareholder unfair prejudice claim, preferred market-based valuation for SYRI and LBNS, rejected quasi-interest, and withheld wider buy-out relief.
Explore more
