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 Court of Appeal dismissed 56 Fellows Road Limited’s appeal, holding that Mr Wolanski’s personal payment did not discharge the company’s judgment debt to ABC Block Management Limited.
Aerovias del Continente Americano SA Avianca & Ors v Versilia Solutions Ltd [2026] EWHC 282 (Ch) (12 February 2026)
The High Court held that provisional liquidators’ sale of Versilia Solutions’ business and assets was within their powers, and in any event would be ratified.
Section 67 challenge succeeded for A1 and A3: C lacked authority to bind them and there was no ratification. A2’s challenge failed under section 73.
A1 & Ors v P [2025] EWHC 3372 (Comm) (19 December 2025)
Section 67 arbitration challenge decided that A1 and A3 were not bound by the engagement, while A2’s jurisdiction objection was barred by section 73.
Commercial Court decision on authority, ratification and limitation in a disputed $5 million loan arrangement. The claim was dismissed as time barred.
Al Othman Holding Company v Al Rajhi Holding WLL [2025] EWHC 3078 (Comm) (21 November 2025)
Commercial Court claim over an alleged US$5 million loan failed after the court found no binding loan agreement, no effective acknowledgment, and no extension.
Xtellus Capital Partners Inc v DL Invest Group PM SA [2025] EWHC 1989 (Comm) (28 July 2025)
The High Court held that DL Invest Group PM S.A. was the contracting party, had held out Dominik Leszczyński as authorised, and owed Xtellus the success fee.
Payments by JRGL to KPL and AGL were made in breach of directors' duties, constituted transactions at an undervalue and preferences under the Insolvency Act 1986, and were received with knowledge by connected parties. Recovery is not limited to the shortfall in the administration; full repayment is ordered.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that the alleged contract of affreightment was void under Swiss law for conflict of interest and, alternatively, not binding in English law.
Palmali Shipping SA v Litasco SA [2025] EWHC 1149 (Comm) (23 May 2025)
Commercial Court trial on whether a 2005 contract of affreightment bound Litasco, including authority, conflict of interest, ratification, and related payment claims.
Explore more
