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 refused a claimants’ application to stop the estate’s representative pursuing a Ukrainian matrimonial property regime defence and counterclaim.
The application for a stay was dismissed because the overlap between the issues in the English disqualification proceedings and the Australian insurance litigation was not sufficient to justify a stay. The interests of justice, the public interest in expeditious determination of disqualification proceedings, and the statutory regime require that all issues be tried together. Splitting the trial would lead to delay, duplication, and undermine the cumulative assessment of director conduct mandated by law.
Source excerpt
The High Court granted an anti-suit injunction restraining overlapping Iraqi proceedings, finding the claimant’s parallel litigation after losing in England was vexatious and oppressive.
The Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Greensill [2025] EWHC 1380 (Ch) (13 May 2025)
The High Court refused to stay a director disqualification issue pending related Australian proceedings, holding that the overlap did not justify delaying the public interest case.
JSC DTEK Krymenergo v The Russian Federation [2025] EWHC 1060 (Comm) (02 May 2025)
The High Court granted a stay of enforcement pending Dutch annulment proceedings, but only on condition that Russia pay the award, interest, and costs into court.
The Court of Appeal held that clause 14 kept English jurisdiction over the appellant’s purchase-price claims and lifted a stay of those claims.
Hipgnosis SFH 1 Ltd v Manilow & Anor [2025] EWCA Civ 486 (17 April 2025)
The Court of Appeal held that an asymmetric jurisdiction clause did not remove English jurisdiction over the appellant’s purchase price claims, and set aside the stay.
Hipgnosis SFH 1 Ltd v Manilow & Ors [2025] EWHC 444 (Ch) (27 February 2025)
The High Court stayed claims about a disputed purchase price under a music catalogue agreement, holding those claims belonged in Los Angeles or could proceed there.
The husband's conduct in raising a jurisdictional challenge in England, thereby stalling the wife's divorce application, while simultaneously advancing substantive divorce proceedings in Territory Y, is vexatious and unconscionable. The Hemain injunction is necessary to prevent him from gaining an unfair forensic advantage and to ensure fairness pending determination of jurisdiction in England.
Source excerpt
The court refused the interim declaration because it could not be satisfied to a high degree of assurance that the proposed interim licence was FRAND, the declaration would serve only a slender purpose in the English proceedings, and its substantial effect would be to influence the German proceedings, which is not an appropriate use of the court's declaratory power. The stay application was refused because the German proceedings would not determine FRAND terms, so there were no compelling grounds to stay the English proceedings.
Source excerpt
Explore more
