Background: Virgin Media used framework contractors to build and expand fibre networks. Three framework agreements originally made with NMCN plc were novated to Svella Connect after NMCN entered administration. The agreements contained an express obligation to act in a spirit of mutual trust and co-operation, but did not guarantee Svella any work, permitted Virgin Media to…
Held: Mr Justice Pepperall granted Virgin Media summary judgment on the claims for breach of implied duties of good faith. The governing inquiry was not simply whether an agreement could be labelled “relational,” but whether, under orthodox principles for implying contractual terms, the express bargain left a gap and the proposed term was necessary for business efficacy or so obvious that…
Background: The plaintiffs, irrigated agricultural businesses near the upper Murray River and individual farmers associated with them, brought representative proceedings against the Murray-Darling Basin Authority. They alleged that the Authority’s operation of the river system during the 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 water years caused water to be lost through overbank transfers into the Barmah-Millewa Forest, reducing water…
Held: Faulkner J held that the Authority did not owe the plaintiffs or represented irrigators the alleged duty to avoid pure economic loss. The statutory scheme required the Authority to operate the Murray River in the public interest, execute intergovernmental water-sharing arrangements, and manage competing State and stakeholder interests. A private-law duty focused on particular irrigators would be incongruous with that…
Background: Aleksandr Viktorovich Prosetskii alleged that Viktor Sergeevich Baransky and his associates engineered a scheme to deprive him of his beneficial interest in shares of Seasreno Marine Ltd and Infinite Tide Corp, the companies through which the crude oil tanker MT Raven, later renamed MT Vikram, was held. He claimed that his shares were transferred to…
Held: The High Court allowed Courtwell’s application and set aside the Mareva injunction against it and the receivership order. Prosetskii had not established a good arguable case against Courtwell because the vessel could not be treated as his personally owned asset: the evidence did not support a good arguable case that the vessel had not been injected as capital into Seasreno…
Background: The federal government began replacing the White House’s East Wing in October 2025. After completing demolition of the existing wing in December, it proceeded with construction of a new East Wing containing a below-ground military installation and an above-ground ballroom.
Held: The Supreme Court granted the government’s application and stayed the district court’s preliminary injunction pending disposition of a timely certiorari petition and any ensuing Supreme Court proceedings. The Court concluded that the government was likely to succeed in showing that the Trust lacked Article III standing because its asserted injury rested on one member’s aesthetic distaste for the proposed ballroom’s…
Background: Patrick Kinane was charged with four theft offences allegedly committed while he was already on bail. Cork District Court refused bail on 30 July 2026. When Kinane appeared unrepresented before Clonmel District Court on 4 August, the judge declined to reconsider bail because there had been no change of circumstances and remanded him in custody.
Held: Mr Justice Garrett Simons held that the 10 August order granted conventional bail under the High Court’s full and original bail jurisdiction. Its duration was tied to the District Court criminal proceedings, not to the Article 40 inquiry. That distinguished it from interim release under Article 40.4.2°, which temporarily releases a detainee only until the inquiry is determined and requires…
Background: AA, a Swedish citizen, planned to move permanently to Spain with his wife and minor children during the summer of 2025. The family sold its permanent home in Sweden, with the buyer taking possession on September 30, 2025, after which the family was no longer registered as resident in Sweden. Before moving, AA sought an…
Held: The Supreme Administrative Court did not decide whether AA retained substantial connections to Sweden. It vacated the advance ruling and dismissed the application because the facts were not sufficiently clear and complete to permit an advance ruling. The Court emphasized that an applicant must provide a record that is clear and unambiguous enough for the stated question to be answered.
Background: The applicants were involved in long-running proceedings concerning land-restitution claims in Slovakia. The cases arose from the same domestic proceedings previously considered by the European Court of Human Rights in two Balogh and Others judgments. For many applicants, the relevant proceedings began in December 2004. A stage before the Nitra Regional Court began on 22…
Held: The Court unanimously held that the excessive overall length of the administrative proceedings breached Article 6 § 1’s “reasonable time” requirement. It rejected Slovakia’s non-exhaustion argument, reasoning that the applicants had used the constitutional complaint, which pursued the same objectives—acceleration and compensation—as the newer administrative action. The applicants were not required to pursue that parallel remedy as well, particularly because…
Background: Solution Assur 3D Inc. was owned by spouses Anaïs Archambault and Kevin Bouchard, who planned to support their family through an organic fruit-and-vegetable permaculture business. The company acquired vacant land in Saint-Calixte, Quebec, began clearing planting areas and purchasing equipment, and started constructing buildings in March 2016. After encountering difficulties, the shareholders abandoned the project…
Held: The Tax Court allowed the appeal and remitted the matter to the Minister for reconsideration and reassessment. It held that the transfer was an exempt supply under section 12. On the balance of probabilities, the evidence established that the land was used in a commercial activity constituting a farming business, even though the project had not reached maturity. The statutory…
Background: The claimant had entered into service-procurement contracts with several contractor companies. After a nonparty worker employed by the contractors was dismissed and obtained judgments for employment-related claims, the claimant paid the worker and sought reimbursement of TRY 35,829.46 from the contractors in proportion to the worker’s periods of service.
Held: The Regional Court rejected the claimant’s appeal on the merits, finding no procedural or substantive error within the scope of the asserted appellate grounds. It left intact the first-instance court’s conclusion that the claimant could recover the employee-related sums from the responsible contractors and upheld the allocation of the principal amounts.
Background: Shawna Zito-Hannan sought workers’ compensation survivor benefits after her husband, longtime Electric Boat employee Michael Joseph Hannan, died in his sleep from a cardiac event in February 2020. Hannan had preexisting heart disease and other cardiac risk factors. In the months before his death, he frequently traveled to Florida for work and worked six days…
Held: The Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed the board’s decision. Reading the administrative law judge’s decision as a whole, the court concluded that the judge understood and rejected Zito-Hannan’s repetitive-trauma theory rather than improperly requiring proof of a sudden or unusual workplace stressor.
Background: Z.H., the mother of S.R., appealed from a ruling of the Circuit Court for Brevard County in an underlying child-dependency proceeding. Circuit Judge Charles G. Crawford entered the order under review.
Held: The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s ruling in a per curiam decision. Chief Judge Jay and Judges Makar and Soud concurred.
Background: The father sought the summary return of six-year-old G to Country A under the 1980 Hague Convention. The mother had removed G from Country A to Country B without the father’s consent. She ultimately accepted that G had been habitually resident in Country A, that the father had been exercising custody rights, and that the…
Held: The High Court held that the mother had established the Article 13(b) exception. Despite identified limitations in a psychiatrist’s report, including reliance partly on the mother’s account and incomplete access to medical records, the court accepted its conclusions because they followed a formal mental-health assessment. It found that returning the mother to Country A, or separating her from G, risked…