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 just case management solution is to hear the remitted matters and the claimant’s summary judgment application separately and sequentially, with the remitted matters first, and not to stay the summary judgment application, balancing the interests of both parties and avoiding undue prejudice to other litigants.
Source excerpt
Summary judgment is refused because the contractual construction is difficult, the factual matrix is incomplete and disputed, and there is a real prospect that further evidence at trial could materially affect the outcome. The contract is poorly drafted and contains internal tensions regarding the definition and scope of 'Prospective Investors', and the exclusions in Schedules A and B. The court's preliminary view is that the Placement Fee is likely limited to investors introduced by Quest, but this is not definitively decided at this stage.
Source excerpt
The Commercial Court partly struck out a defence and counterclaim for inadequate pleading, but left valuation and appropriation issues for trial.
Summary judgment was granted for the defendants on liability for Claim 2. The court held Persimmon had no realistic prospect of proving an extension of time.
The High Court dismissed a strike-out and summary judgment application in a probate dispute over whether a 2021 will was valid and whether earlier Court of Protection findings bound the estate.
The claimant failed to establish the existence of new evidence, conscious and deliberate dishonesty, or materiality as required to set aside the prior judgments for fraud. The claims were totally without merit, time-barred, and abusive, warranting summary judgment and strike out against both defendants.
Source excerpt
The Defendant's pleaded and argued fraud and public policy defences have no realistic prospect of success because they do not allege or evidence fraud practised on the New York Court, nor do they show that enforcement of the New York judgment itself would be contrary to English public policy. The alleged historic or background fraud relating to the source of the funds is not sufficient to defeat enforcement of a foreign judgment under English law. There is no operative fraud, no duty of disclosure breached, and no public policy reason to refuse enforcement. The Defendant's attempt to raise th…
Source excerpt
Navaian & Anor v King Charles III Charitable Fund & Ors [2026] EWHC 1220 (KB) (21 May 2026)
The High Court held that claims over a failed fundraising collaboration had no realistic prospect of success, save for an arguable ÂŁ25,000 expenses claim against FareShare.
The High Court granted summary judgment for the defendants on breach of contract, misrepresentation, and interference claims, leaving only a possible ÂŁ25,000 expense claim against FareShare.
The Commercial Court held that an SPA clause gave the English courts exclusive jurisdiction and restrained Italian proceedings brought by Nio.
Explore more
