Daily Case Law
Monday, July 6, 2026 · 12 decisions worth your morning coffee
United Kingdom

Harvey v Heaver — High Court orders trial on current fitness to human habitation; finds widespread damp, mould, and asbestos ceiling render mid-century dwelling unfit under section 9A of Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

High Court (King's Bench Division) · 2026-07-03real estate

Background: A family of six—two adults and four children aged 7 to 16—occupied a mid-nineteenth-century solid-walled property near Chichester in West Sussex under an assured shorthold tenancy since September 2020. The property is part of a former farm complex. The family brought claims against their landlord, Polly Louise Heaver, and the managing agent for breach of…

Held: Deputy Judge Paul Bowen KC found the property unfit for human habitation under section 9A. The expert's uncontested evidence established widespread and severe defects: (1) damp and mould present in every habitable room and both roof spaces, with moisture meter readings reaching saturated "wet" levels (readings of 999 on a scale maxing at 999, and 21–51% moisture content on timber)…

Read the full analysis →

France

S. v. Pôle Oise Ophtalmologie — Court partially overturned lower court, requiring recalculation of overtime compensation and seniority credit for severance

Court of Cassation (France) — Social Chamber · 2026-07-01breach of contractcivil procedureemployment

Background: Mme [S] was hired on December 28, 2015, as a medical secretary by Pôle Oise Ophtalmologie, a healthcare cooperative, under an indefinite employment contract. On June 23, 2017, she was promoted to head of secretaries through an amendment to her contract. Her employment was governed by the national collective agreement for medical cabinet staff, effective…

Held: The Court of Cassation partially overturned the lower court's judgment on two critical issues. First, regarding overtime compensation, the Court held that the lower court violated Article L. 3171-4 of the Labor Code by failing to properly analyze whether the employee had presented sufficiently precise evidence of uncompensated hours. The employee had identified specific evidence: 23 unpaid days reflected on…

Read the full analysis →

Australia

AB v Australian Broadcasting Corporation — Court grants interlocutory injunction restraining publication of private text messages obtained without consent

Supreme Court of New South Wales · 2026-07-01civil procedure

Background: Three professional athletes with close personal relationships communicated for eight years via a private group chat accessible only to them. One plaintiff (AB) had a four-year romantic relationship with the second defendant (GH), an individual with significant social media influence. During and after their relationship, GH accessed AB's old mobile phone without authorization, photographed portions…

Held: Justice McGrath found the plaintiffs had established a very strong prima facie case for breach of confidence. The court held that the group chat messages possessed the necessary quality of confidence—they were private communications exchanged only between close friends over many years, never disseminated to third parties. The information was imparted in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence; the defendants'…

Read the full analysis →

Israel

Outline Plan 38 Betterment Levy — Supreme Court denies rehearing requests; confirms that value increases from unapplied national earthquake-safety plan are not subject to betterment levy

Supreme Court of Israel · 2026-07-05constitutional

Background: In 2005, Israel approved Outline Plan 38 ("OP38"), a nationwide regulatory framework for earthquake-proofing existing buildings. Unlike detailed land-use plans, OP38 is a flexible master plan containing general directives; local planning committees have discretion to issue building permits under it, but are not required to. Many properties fall within OP38's scope yet never receive permits…

Held: Justice Vilner affirmed that a rehearing is warranted only in exceptional cases: when a decision contradicts prior Supreme Court doctrine, or when the decision establishes novel law of significant difficulty or importance that itself justifies reconsideration. The standard is demanding because finality of judgment is foundational to judicial authority.

Read the full analysis →

Brazil

Voluntary Retirement Damages — Upheld damages award for state pension institute’s unjustified delay in issuing required retirement documentation

Superior Tribunal de Justiça · 2026-07-03constitutional

Background: A female public employee met all requirements for voluntary retirement with full benefits (integralidade e paridade) as of May 17, 2018. In September 2020, she requested issuance of a "Declaração de Tempo de Contribuição" (Declaration of Contribution Time), a mandatory document required by state law (LC/ES nº 282/2004, art. 25) to proceed with her retirement…

Held: The Superior Tribunal de Justiça unanimously rejected all challenges and upheld the damages award. The Court held that the lower court's decision was sufficiently clear and well-reasoned on all pertinent issues relevant to resolving the dispute. The institution had failed to demonstrate any violation of the procedural requirements invoked.

Read the full analysis →

Canada

Tarasitch v. Canada (Attorney General) — Federal Court upholds denial of pandemic income benefits

Federal Court (Canada) · 2026-07-03employment

Background: Stanislas Tarasitch applied for two federal pandemic income benefits: the Canada Recovery Benefit (PCRE) and the Canada Worker Lockdown Benefit (PCTCC). Both programs were introduced to support workers unable to work due to COVID-19. The Canada Revenue Agency initially approved all his applications without prior validation, but later audited his file. After three separate examinations,…

Held: Applying the reasonable-decision standard from Vavilov, Justice Joyal upheld the Canada Revenue Agency's conclusions. The court found the validation agent reasonably determined Tarasitch was ineligible for the Canada Recovery Benefit on two independent grounds. First, Tarasitch failed the statutory requirement that unemployment be "for reasons related to COVID-19." Since he had been unemployed for a year before the pandemic was…

Read the full analysis →

Florida

Major v. Monroe County Sheriff’s Office — Florida First DCA affirmed without published reasoning

Florida First District Court of Appeal · 2026-06-30civil procedure

Background: Antonio Michael Major appealed a decision rendered by the Florida Commission on Human Relations (FCHR). Major initiated an administrative complaint against the Monroe County Sheriff's Office. The FCHR issued a decision that was adverse to Major's claims. Major then appealed to the First District Court of Appeal, represented pro se.

Held: The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the FCHR's decision in its entirety. The court issued a per curiam opinion without extensive written reasoning, indicating agreement with the lower administrative body's determination. All three appellate judges—Rowe, Ray, and Nordby, JJ.—concurred in the decision to affirm.

Read the full analysis →

United Kingdom

R (Manby) v LB Hackney — High Court examines whether planning authority properly considered 45-degree design rule for neighbors’ amenity

High Court (Administrative Court) · 2026-07-02constitutional

Background: Bronwen Manby, the claimant and owner of 89 Culford Road in Hackney, challenged the London Borough of Hackney's decision to grant planning permission for residential extensions at the neighboring property, 87 Culford Road. The proposed development included a single-storey lower ground floor extension (extending 2 meters beyond the existing extension), an upper ground floor rear…

Held: HHJ Russen KC examined whether the planning authority was under a legal obligation to determine whether the 45-degree rule was met regarding the claimant's property, and whether failure to do so constituted an error of law. The judge considered three alternative formulations of the claimant's principal ground: (1) if the officer determined compliance, whether this involved a mistake of fact;…

Read the full analysis →

France

Case No. 26-82.275 — Court of Cassation reverses sexual assault conviction on retroactivity grounds, ruling a 2025 consent-based definition cannot apply to pre-2025 conduct

Court of Cassation (France) — Criminal Chamber · 2026-07-01criminal

Background: In September 2021, a woman filed a criminal complaint against her uncle alleging physical and sexual violence, including alleged sexual penetration occurring between January 2015 and September 2021. The investigating judge charged him with rape, sexual assault, violence, and corruption of a minor, with the charges aggravated by the victim's age (under fifteen). Following the…

Held: The Court of Cassation ruled that the new law violated the principle against retroactive application of criminal statutes. Article 112-1 of the French Penal Code provides that only facts constituting an offense at the time they were committed are punishable, and penalties apply according to the law in force at that time. However, the provision permits an exception: new statutes…

Read the full analysis →

Australia

Conway v Leeroy Property Investments Pty Ltd — Court of Appeal upholds development consent, rejects judicial review and easement claims on overshadowing grounds

Court of Appeal of New South Wales · 2026-07-02constitutionalreal estate

Background: Three residential lots in Casuarina, New South Wales were historically owned together and treated as one landholding. In 2020, the property was split: Leeroy Property Investments Pty Ltd acquired Lots 50 and 51, while Ms. Vashti Conway purchased Lot 52. Ms. Conway's house features a large external courtyard with a partially roofed area facing the…

Held: The Court of Appeal (Kirk JA, McHugh JA, and Free JA) dismissed the appeal unanimously. On the judicial review ground, the court held that the Council did not breach its obligations in considering the development. While accepting that the PAPOS should logically encompass the entire courtyard, the court found no evidence that the decision-maker failed to consider the overshadowing effect…

Read the full analysis →

Israel

Nidal Younis Abu Aram v. Military Commander, West Bank — Supreme Court dismisses petition as alternative remedy available

Supreme Court of Israel · 2026-07-05civil procedureconstitutional

Background: The petitioners are residents of two villages—Safai and Maj'az—located in "Fire Zone 918," a military-controlled area in southern Hebron declared a closed military zone in the early 1980s and subject to a closure order since 1999. Beginning in 2016, the petitioners sought to submit building plans for their communities. Following initial litigation, the Supreme Court…

Held: The Supreme Court dismissed the petition as moot due to the existence of an adequate alternative remedy. The court held that petitioners must pursue their claims before the Administrative Court in Jerusalem, which has jurisdiction over decisions of planning authorities under planning law. The court concluded that both the MTP's June 2025 decision and the sub-committees' rejections fell within the…

Read the full analysis →

Brazil

AREsp 3178564 — Superior Court upholds insurance company’s duty to pay life insurance benefits to all legal beneficiaries under the Civil Code

Superior Tribunal de Justiça · 2026-07-03insurance coverage

Background: A daughter sought recovery of life insurance indemnity benefits owed to her following the death of her father, the policyholder, while his insurance policy was in force. The insurance company had paid the entire indemnity to only one beneficiary despite the policy containing no designation of specific beneficiaries. The plaintiff filed suit in the Court…

Held: The insurance company appealed to the Superior Tribunal de Justiça (STJ), claiming the lower court's decision violated federal law regarding res judicata (final judgment) by citing Articles 502, 485(V), and 337(VII) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The STJ's President dismissed the special appeal for deficient reasoning, applying Supreme Court Precedent 284/STF, which holds that appeals lacking adequate explanation are…

Read the full analysis →

Want this in your inbox every morning, filtered to your jurisdictions?
Subscribe free at dailycaselaw.com →
Full analyses at Case Law Wire. Summaries are AI-generated and are not legal advice.