Background: In 2014, the High Court granted ACC Bank PLC an order for possession of two properties belonging to Niall Quinn following his default on loan obligations in 2009. The order was made after a four-day hearing and included a four-month stay. One property (in Athlone) was later sold in 2023; the other, located at 140…
Held: Justice Liam Kennedy held that Everyday Finance DAC is entitled to enforce the 2014 order for possession. The court established that a company's change of name does not affect its legal rights, obligations, or ability to enforce a judgment, citing section 30(6) of the Companies Act 2014 (the successor to section 23(4) of the Companies Act 1963). The court further…
Background: Joshua and Ashley Idler married in April 2008 and separated in January 2023 after more than a decade of severe domestic violence. Their marriage produced ten children, all minors at the time Mother filed for divorce. Father’s criminal record was central to the trial court’s rulings: in 2021 he pleaded guilty to felony child abuse,…
Held: Summary affirmance for want of cogent argument. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Jarosh applied Wyoming’s well-established rule that appeals “not presented with cogent argument or pertinent authority” will be summarily affirmed. In Interest of BFW, 2017 WY 64, ¶ 5, 395 P.3d 184, 185 (Wyo. 2017). Despite presenting nine issues, Father’s opening brief contained a single paragraph of substantive…
Background: On the night of 24 October 1987, two armed men robbed the Red Fox Tavern in Maramarua, a small village south of Auckland. During the robbery, one of the assailants shot and killed the publican, Christopher Bush, with a sawn-off shotgun. The offenders escaped with approximately $31,000 in cash and $4,900 in cheques. Despite a…
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeals and set aside the convictions, entering judgments of acquittal. The Court held that the jury verdicts were unreasonable and could not stand. Applying the test from R v Owen, the Court assessed whether a reasonable jury could have reached guilty verdicts beyond reasonable doubt, having regard to all the evidence. The majority (Winkelmann…
Background: In 2001, the municipality of Ramat Hasharon approved an urban development plan to expand two roads in order to provide access to a school, cemetery, and residential neighborhood. The plan required expropriation of approximately 45 dunams of land held by the Green Village (a government-run youth village and educational institution) under a long-term lease agreement…
Held: The Supreme Court reversed the district court's award of 2.1 million NIS in compensation. Justice Ruth Ronen, writing for a unanimous panel, held that the original 2009 agreement exhausted the Green Village's right to claim expropriation compensation. The court analyzed the agreement's language, noting the preamble stated compensation was given "regarding receipt of the land parcels required" and "regarding payment…
Background: Richard Klungle had lived for five years in a home owned by his grandmother. When she died intestate in 2022, the property passed to her four children rather than to Klungle. He refused to leave, believing his grandmother had intended him to inherit it. After a court-ordered eviction went unenforced, Emmet County Sheriff's deputies arrived…
Held: In a unanimous opinion by Justice Bolden, the Michigan Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, vacated all of Klungle's convictions and sentences, and remanded for a new trial. The Court held that Lyons's unilateral concession of guilt on the trespassing charge violated Klungle's Sixth Amendment right of autonomy to maintain innocence as the objective of his defense, as established…
Background: Connor Balzan was injured as a passenger in a 2019 car accident, and his damages exceeded the at-fault driver's insurance limits. Connor was a named insured on a State Farm UIM policy covering his own 2013 Hyundai Elantra ($250,000 in UIM coverage), which State Farm paid out in full. His parents, Russell and Kimberly Balzan,…
Held: The Arizona Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the superior court's grant of summary judgment for State Farm, vacating the court of appeals' reasoning on the "one insured" question. The Court held that the phrase "purchased by one insured" in A.R.S. § 20-259.01(H) refers to the named insured who exercised the statutory legal authority to obtain UIM coverage — not to every…
Background: Nathaniel Moffat, Nathaniel Moffat, and Sarah Srebro are siblings whose parents died in 2020 and 2021. Their mother's will, probated in Maryland, left the residue of her estate to the Pamela Dawson Moffat Revocable Trust, which required the trustee to distribute Trust property equally among the three children. Nathaniel served as both executor of the…
Held: The New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed on all issues. On the partition ruling, the court held that the probate court did not abuse its broad equitable discretion in awarding 34 Kings Highway to Sarah. The record supported the probate court's findings that neither sibling had requested the property, the property had been in the family for over a century, Sarah…
Background: The defendant KW is a 39-year-old male with a history of escalating sexual offenses against children. He was convicted of aggravated indecent assault in 2001 (aged 14, against his sister) and again in 2013 (against his ex-wife's 11-year-old daughter). In 2018, he committed the index offenses: he groomed a 14-year-old girl online via Facebook, arranged…
Held: Richardson J found that the State had satisfied the preliminary test under s 7(4) of the Act—namely, that the matters alleged in the supporting documentation would, if proved, justify the making of a final ESO. The critical issue was whether the defendant poses an "unacceptable risk" of committing another serious sexual offense if not kept under supervision, as required by…
Background: On 1 September 2025, the Home Secretary suspended new applications for refugee family reunion (RFR) under Appendix Family Reunion (Sponsors with Protection) (Appendix FRP), requiring refugees' family members to apply instead under the general family reunion route (Appendix FM). The suspension was pending a wider review of family reunion rules. Since 2023, Appendix FRP had…
Held: Mr Justice Coppel held that the Home Secretary's decision to suspend Appendix FRP was unlawful. The court found the suspension irrational on multiple grounds. The evidence showed that the Home Office had not properly investigated whether the suspension would achieve its stated objective of relieving pressure on local authorities, and had failed to weigh the demonstrable harm to vulnerable refugees…
Background: The plaintiff owned a large-waste processing facility (the Gifu East Clean Center) in Gifu City. The defendant was contracted to operate and maintain the facility. In October 2015, the plaintiff requested the defendant's employees to repair a cracked metal plate beneath a conveyor system. During the welding repair work, the defendant's employee's gross negligence caused…
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the lower court on two critical points. First, regarding demolition costs, the Court held these constitute damages with adequate causal connection to the fire. The Court reasoned that because the fire made repair impossible or extraordinarily difficult, the building was extensively damaged across a wide area, the building had a remaining useful life of significant…
Background: M. [B] and Mme [U] [D] divorced in 2006. In 2008, M. [B] sued for liquidation and partition of their matrimonial property. He simultaneously initiated proceedings before Indian courts in 2007 regarding division of rights to an immovable property located in India. In September 2016, the Versailles Court of Appeal found international litispendance (parallel proceedings)…
Held: The Court of Cassation, reversing in part, held that res judicata from a decision recognizing international litispendance cannot be invoked when the litispendance situation itself has ended through subsequent events. The Court noted that while decisions on litispendance are clothed with res judicata effect under Article 480 of the Civil Procedure Code, this protection applies only so long as the…
Background: This case arose from a foreclosure action brought by U.S. Bank National Association, acting as trustee for a Citigroup mortgage loan trust backed by asset-backed pass-through certificates issued in 2007, against homeowner Phyllis Kehaulani Duncan Chun. The case was filed in the Circuit Court of the First Circuit of Hawai'i (Case No. 1CC141002192), indicating the…
Held: The Hawai'i Supreme Court rejected Chun's Application for Writ of Certiorari on July 6, 2026. The one-page order, signed by all five justices, provides no written analysis or reasoning, which is typical for certiorari denials — the court exercises its discretion to decline review without explaining its rationale.