Background: Kelechi Cecelia Obi, a Nigerian national, obtained leave to remain as a sponsored skilled worker after Renaissance Nurseries assigned her a certificate of sponsorship for a nutritionist position. She alleged that the promised employment became an exploitative arrangement: she received fewer hours than promised, had to bear employment-related costs and tax liabilities, and was required…
Held: The High Court dismissed the challenge to the curtailment decision. Rule 9.27.1(d) gave the Secretary of State discretion to cancel permission after sponsored employment ceased, but did not require a preliminary assessment of every aspect of the worker’s private life or vulnerability. Cessation of sponsored employment was a failure to maintain the basis of the immigration route, not a breach…
Background: Gabriel Bio and G.B. Marktec Ltd. sued brothers Yehezkel and Ephraim Fishel Pollak to recover money allegedly advanced under three loan agreements. The first two agreements, both dated November 17, 2019, documented loans of ₪2 million and ₪117,000, carried annual interest of 6%, and required repayment within 12 months. Although both brothers were named as…
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the Pollaks’ appeal. It held that the dispute turned overwhelmingly on factual findings and witness credibility, matters on which an appellate court intervenes only exceptionally. The District Court had conducted the proceedings over approximately four years, heard the witnesses, examined the documents, and reasonably preferred the lenders’ account. Nothing showed that its conclusions plainly conflicted…
Background: The proceedings concerned four full siblings. Haley and Luke had lived with their proposed adoptive parents, Gloria and Jay, since December 2022, while Manny and Alex had lived with Claire and Phil since January 2023. The children entered care following concerns including neglect, parental drug use, domestic violence, homelessness and unsafe living conditions. A Children’s…
Held: McGrath J held that adoption was clearly preferable in the best interests of each child and ordered that Haley and Luke be adopted by Gloria and Jay, and that Manny and Alex be adopted by Claire and Phil. The Court found that the placements provided stable, nurturing and permanent family relationships suited to the children’s individual developmental, emotional, educational and…
Background: Nanyang Law LLC employed Ghui Meng Yang as a Supporting Officer beginning on 10 April 2023. His employment terms prescribed a three-month probation period ending on 9 July 2023 and allowed either party to terminate the contract during probation by giving one month’s prior written notice, without providing a reason.
Held: The High Court dismissed the appeal. It held that a contract containing a specified probation period is not automatically a contract of service for a specified period under s 9(1). Whether employment terminates automatically at the end of probation depends on the language and construction of the particular contract, considered where appropriate in its factual context.
Background: President Trump issued Executive Order No. 14399 concerning federal election integrity. Section 2(a) directed the Secretary of Homeland Security, to the extent feasible and lawful, to create and distribute state citizenship lists; §2(b) directed the Attorney General to prioritize appropriate investigations and prosecutions involving ballots issued to ineligible voters; and §3(b) directed the Postal Service…
Held: The Supreme Court granted the federal government's stay application. It concluded that the government was likely to establish that the district court lacked jurisdiction because the States' challenges were barred by standing and ripeness principles. In the Court's view, the executive order itself imposed no obligations on the States, and any injury from future agency implementation depended on contingent events…
Background: O. C. and W. I., who were never married, are the parents of a child born in 2017. After their relationship ended, O. C. sought sole legal and physical custody. She alleged that W. I. had displayed erratic behavior and unusual beliefs and asked the trial court to require psychological evaluation and psychotherapy before allowing…
Held: The Appellate Court affirmed the custody judgment. Whether to order a parent to undergo a psychological evaluation is committed to the trial court’s discretion. Although the record contained evidence that could have supported such an evaluation, the trial court considered W. I.’s behavior and unconventional religious beliefs but did not find that they indicated a threat or tendency toward violence.…
Background: Jun Jin, a 51-year-old citizen of China, applied for permanent residence under the Start-Up Business Class in February 2022. Immigration officials found him eligible in January 2024, and his medical examination and police certificates were complete. Security screening had been completed for his spouse and children, but his own screening remained pending.
Held: The Federal Court dismissed the mandamus application without costs. It held that section 87.3 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act authorized the Minister to establish processing priorities, including priorities applying to pending applications. Because Jin did not challenge the validity or legality of that provision or establish bad faith, improper purpose, or abuse of discretion, the 2024 and 2025…
Background: Aleisa Martin sued Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center after allegedly falling inside the hospital. Her petition asserted that a sticky substance had been left on the floor without any warning of the dangerous condition.
Held: The Louisiana First Circuit granted the hospital’s writ application, reversed the October 6, 2025 judgment, and entered summary judgment dismissing Martin’s claims against the hospital with prejudice. The court held that Martin failed to produce factual support creating a genuine issue of material fact as to whether a hazardous condition existed.
Background: The dispute concerned Moonhills, a substantial Hampshire property purchased in 1984 entirely with funds provided by Jim Bisiker but registered in the name of his daughter Judith. The property served as Judith’s home for approximately 11 years and was also used by other family members. Jim funded extensive improvements and most of its running costs.
Held: The High Court found that Moonhills was purchased for Judith to own absolutely. On the balance of probabilities, Jim and Judith had neither agreed nor shared a common intention in 1984 that Judith would hold the property on trust. Contemporary evidence showed that Jim wished to avoid owning a UK property for tax reasons, intended to provide Judith with a…
Background: Yael Levy borrowed money from Israel Discount Bank in 2019, secured by a mortgage over a residential property in Ramat Gan. After the loan remained unpaid despite extensions, the bank began enforcement proceedings. While represented by counsel, Levy signed a June 2025 undertaking acknowledging a debt of approximately NIS 1.1 million, agreeing to repay it…
Held: Justice Gila Canfy-Steinitz denied leave to appeal. Third-tier review is available only sparingly, where a case presents a general question extending beyond the parties or denial would cause a miscarriage of justice. That standard applies with particular force to a second request for leave concerning an interlocutory ruling on interim relief. The lower-court decisions were confined to the case’s specific…
Background: Deanne Nevin sought a family provision order under s 59 of the Succession Act 2006 (NSW) concerning the estate of her father, Grahame Bernard Nevin. His 2021 will left his entire estate to Kristie Nevin-Large, his daughter from his second marriage, and made no provision for Deanne.
Held: Bennett J held that it was appropriate to determine whether the alleged abuse occurred because the allegations were relevant to the family relationships, Deanne’s long absence from the deceased’s life, her health and financial needs, and the deceased’s moral obligations. Applying the civil standard of proof appropriate to the gravity of the allegations, the Court found that the deceased had…
Background: Aldenir Pereira Alves, Cristiana Barros Alves, and their two minor children, all Brazilian citizens, entered the United States without authorization in October 2021. They sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture, alleging that two Brazilian military police officers had threatened and mistreated Cristiana’s family because of her brother Jaider’s gang…
Held: The First Circuit denied both petitions. Applying substantial-evidence review, it upheld the agency’s finding that the petitioners had not suffered past persecution. Cristiana’s threats of arrest were unfulfilled and were not shown to have caused significant actual suffering or harm; Aldenir and the children were not threatened; and none of the petitioners was physically harmed or arrested. The record also…