Background: Elias Matanes, who operates a dental clinic in Haifa, negotiated with Aplident Ltd. to acquire a dental scanner. Aplident sent him a draft agreement under which he would receive the scanner, order laboratory work from Aplident, and make monthly payments financed by a loan from Payment Financial Technologies Ltd. The draft contained an exclusive clause…
Held: The Supreme Court unanimously granted leave to appeal, allowed the appeal, and ordered the entire action returned to the Haifa Magistrates’ Court. Justice Gila Canfy-Steinitz, joined by Justices David Mintz and Yael Wilner, held that the 2018 Civil Procedure Regulations displaced Amidar’s rule that an exclusive forum clause prevails over the rule governing multiple defendants and may require claims to…
Background: Sorelo operated a restaurant in the [Etablissement 2] shopping center and was a member of the center’s economic interest group, or GIE. After the restructuring plan adopted for Sorelo in 2016 was terminated, the company entered judicial liquidation on August 26, 2020.
Held: The Court of Cassation rejected the appeal. Given the GIE’s purpose of establishing, maintaining, and promoting the shopping center, and the rule making every business operator in the center a member upon payment of dues, the court held that Sorelo was bound to the GIE by an executory contract governed by Article L. 641-11-1 of the Commercial Code.
Background: 365 Rehab Pty Ltd provided workplace rehabilitation services under an approval issued by the State Insurance Regulatory Authority (SIRA). After an onsite evaluation, SIRA found that 365 Rehab had not met several conditions in the applicable approval framework. SIRA issued a show-cause notice, considered the company’s response, and on 28 September 2026 notified it that…
Held: Richardson J refused all of the interlocutory relief sought. Although 365 Rehab had a good prima facie case that SIRA lacked power to issue the limited approval without an application under the Workers Compensation Regulation 2016 (NSW), it did not establish a prima facie case that this apparent invalidity also infected the cancellation. The documents and stated reasons indicated that…
Background: SCUR-Alpha 1092 GmbH, a German holding company in the Schleich toy group, sought sanction under section 899 of the Companies Act 2006 for a scheme restructuring liabilities under an English-law senior facilities agreement. The scheme covered a €169 million term facility and a €20 million revolving credit facility. Among other measures, the restructuring transferred ownership…
Held: Mr Justice Hildyard sanctioned the scheme. He held that the single creditor class remained properly constituted because the post-convening amendments created no material difference in creditors’ rights and UniCredit never became a scheme creditor. The order was also to record approval of the revised voting record time and MeSoFa’s admission to vote as a sanctions-disqualified but voting-eligible scheme creditor.
Background: The parties entered into an agreement for the sale and transfer of marble-factory machinery and equipment for TRY 236,000, payable through 11 checks. Although the buyer characterized the transaction as a transfer of the business, a judgment affirmed by the Court of Cassation treated it as a sale of movable property. After the workplace was…
Held: The Third Civil Chamber held that the provisional attachment was wrongful because the order had ultimately been set aside. Under Article 259(1) of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law, liability for pecuniary loss caused by a wrongful provisional attachment is strict. The record showed that travertine held by the custodian had sustained breakage assessed at 15 percent. The trial court therefore…
Background: On 18 July 2014, Maksym Yuriyovych Prodan was stabbed by two private individuals, sustaining cut wounds to the right side of his face and right shoulder. Criminal proceedings were instituted that same day on suspicion of intentionally inflicting light bodily injuries causing a short-term health disorder. A forensic medical examination conducted in September 2014 classified…
Held: The European Court of Human Rights unanimously held that Ukraine violated the procedural limb of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 3 requires an effective official investigation into alleged ill-treatment even when private individuals, rather than State agents, inflicted it.
Background: Two-year-old G.B. died in March 2015 from starvation and blunt-force trauma inflicted by her parents. Her estate brought wrongful-death and survivorship claims against three Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services caseworkers: Lumadi Lavusa, Shamara Stephens, and Kassi Setty.
Held: The First District reversed summary judgment for the caseworkers and remanded. It held that genuine disputes of material fact existed as to whether each caseworker acted recklessly, which would remove statutory immunity under R.C. 2744.03(A)(6)(b).
Background: In 2017, the three respondents entered into an agreement concerning a residential project in Karmiel. The agreement contained an exclusive arbitration clause. Kleiman–Shamgar, a company later formed by respondents 2 and 3, joined the project in 2022 under a separate agreement that did not contain a comparable arbitration clause.
Held: Justice David Mintz denied leave to appeal. Even assuming that the especially restrictive standard governing appeals in arbitration matters did not apply, the Court held that there was no basis to disturb the District Court’s exercise of discretion concerning interim relief. Appellate intervention in such decisions is generally reserved for exceptional cases, particularly when the trial court has heard the…
Background: Nexity Lamy hired M. [G] [O] as a branch director in 2010. He ultimately directed several branches and served as a regional ambassador, connecting branch directors in the Grand Est region with senior management. At the relevant branch, he supervised approximately 40 employees.
Held: The Social Chamber dismissed the appeal. It reaffirmed that, although an employee generally may not be dismissed for conduct belonging to private life, dismissal is permissible when that conduct creates an objectively established disruption within the business.
Background: In this defamation proceeding, the defendants had successfully obtained leave to amend their defence in an earlier judgment, V’Landys v The Thoroughbred Report Pty Ltd [2026] NSWSC 1146. The Court ordered the plaintiff, Peter V’landys, to pay the defendants’ costs of that contested amendment application.
Held: Campbell J dismissed the variation application and confirmed that V’landys must pay the defendants’ costs of their amendment application. The contested hearing had been required by a real substantive dispute over the proposed particulars, and that dispute was resolved in the defendants’ favour.
Background: Nebahat Evyap İşbilen brought substantial proceedings alleging that Selman Turk dishonestly exceeded his authority when dealing with her assets. Shortly before trial, Turk sought permission to call Stephen Buckland, a former Hampden Bank employee, using a witness summary and to rely on a witness statement from his father, Dr Suleyman Turk.
Held: Mr Justice Adam Johnson granted relief from sanctions and permitted Turk to rely on Buckland’s witness summary, call Buckland at trial, and rely on Dr Turk’s witness statement. Applying the three-stage approach in Denton v TH White Limited, the Court found that both defaults were serious and significant and that Turk had not shown a good reason for serving the…
Background: Andriy Arkadiyovych Uzdemyr was dismissed from a prosecutor’s office in September 2014 for unlawfully prosecuting two participants in the Kyiv protests commonly known as Euromaidan. He challenged the dismissal before Ukraine’s administrative courts.
Held: The European Court of Human Rights unanimously held that Ukraine violated Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. Although Article 6 does not require domestic courts to answer every argument in detail, courts must give reasons adequate to the circumstances and address pertinent and important arguments.