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
On appeal in a probate dispute, the court set aside summary judgment and a debarring order, allowing the particulars of claim to stand as a witness statement.
Patel v O'Sullivan & Ors [2025] EWHC 3326 (Ch) (19 December 2025)
Appeal in a probate dispute partly succeeded on case management, but failed overall. The court set aside summary judgment, kept the stay refusal, and preserved costs.
PX (Contested final hearing), Re [2025] EWCOP 58 (T2) (14 August 2025)
The Court of Protection held that PX lacked capacity to decide residence, contact, care, and internet use, and ordered supervised contact with MX.
The appellant failed to rebut the presumption of capacity; the evidence did not establish he lacked capacity at any material time. He was not a protected party under CPR 21.1 and was not entitled to a litigation friend. The claims were properly struck out as incoherent and not supported by particulars. The failure to provide reasonable adjustments did not render the proceedings unjust, and the statutory immunity applied. The appeal was dismissed and permission to appeal on other grounds was refused.
Source excerpt
Court of Appeal allowed a second appeal in a housing benefit case, holding that a material mistake of fact about the appellant’s capacity caused procedural unfairness.
Permission granted for unopposed amendments and paragraphs 257B, C, D, E, F, H; refused for paragraphs 257G, I and Appendix VI due to lack of coherent pleading, insufficient evidence, and absence of real prospect of success. Security for costs application adjourned to December 2025 CMC; claimants ordered to disclose funding information by 25 July 2025. Directions given for pleadings timetable, Second Stage trial lead claimant selection, and costs management.
Source excerpt
The lower court erred by limiting the success fee to 10% of damages and disallowing the ATE premium; both deductions were contractually agreed, informed, and reasonable, and should be allowed subject to CPR 21.12 caps.
Source excerpt
It is not in Patricia's best interests to receive nasogastric tube feeding with restraint or any other medical treatment against her wishes. Imposing such treatment would be detrimental to her health and wellbeing, and would not achieve the intended therapeutic outcome.
Source excerpt
Ms HXS should be given a further opportunity to act as litigation friend, provided the application to the Court of Protection is made promptly. If not, the Official Solicitor should replace her. There is no current evidence of adverse interest, but her previous lack of insight and breach of order are serious concerns.
Source excerpt
Given the husband's significant reduction in income, the spousal periodical payments order is varied to a nominal level and the child periodical payments are reduced to reflect his current income. The husband's share of the joint F Bank account is to be released to him, less specified deductions for arrears. The wife's persistent non-compliance and lack of representation do not justify further delay. The litigation friend's failure to perform his role justifies a wasted costs order against him.
Source excerpt
Explore more
