Background: French authorities investigated alleged aggravated tax fraud and money laundering involving the sale of substantial French real-estate assets by subsidiaries of the [2] group. The tax administration reported that the sales had produced no French taxation and estimated the tax debt at €202,909,958.60. Investigators suspected that Mr. [L] indirectly held the group subsidiaries’ assets through…
Held: The Court of Cassation quashed the Investigation Chamber’s judgment in full and remanded the case to a differently composed panel of the same court. It did not itself vacate the underlying seizure order. The court held that describing Mr. [L] as the trust’s beneficial owner, even together with his status as the insured person under a policy benefiting the trust,…
Background: Cambridgeshire County Council conducted a competitive flexible procedure under the Procurement Act 2023 for a homecare framework worth an estimated £928.08 million, including VAT, over a term of up to 10 years. At the first-stage compliance gateway, prospective providers had to certify that they held a Care Quality Commission rating of “Good” or “Outstanding.” Verity…
Held: Mrs Justice Jefford entered summary judgment for the council because the claim was issued out of time. The court found that Verity had actual knowledge of the procurement by 18 July at the latest and probably learned of the CQC condition that day when its director accessed the portal. The claimant’s numerous witness statements gave inconsistent and incomplete accounts of…
Background: Hetz VeKeshet Hercules Holdings Ltd. brought contractual and negotiable-instrument claims against Tali Avitan and formal respondent Jacob Avitan. The claims rested in part on a September 2, 2015 loan agreement that fixed Avitan’s outstanding loan debt at NIS 800,000, payable by December 31, 2015, with default interest and agreed damages for nonpayment. Avitan contended that…
Held: Justice Alex Stein denied Avitan’s application for permission to appeal under Regulation 148A of the Civil Procedure Regulations, 2018. Although he had earlier requested a response limited to the accounting result in light of the factual findings below, he ultimately concluded that the application did not justify Supreme Court review in a third round of litigation.
Background: Oklahoma cattle ranchers David Schrammel and Randy Ward agreed to acquire an interest in a Hereford bull, Guardian, from Idaho-based Colyer Herefords and Angus, Inc. Colyer transported Guardian to an Oklahoma City auction, where the plaintiffs submitted the winning $100,000 bid. The transaction gave them an ownership interest in the bull and a one-fourth share…
Held: The Oklahoma Supreme Court first held that the appeal was timely. Because the plaintiffs did not prepare the judgment and proof of service was not entered in the court record within three business days after judgment, the 30-day appeal period began when the certificate of service was filed on October 28, 2025—not when the judgment was filed or purportedly emailed…
Background: Senfu Realty (Private) Limited was established as a vehicle for holding investment properties for the Chuang family. The claimant, Chuang Shaw Cheng, owned 4,193 shares, representing about 19.3% of the shares outside treasury, but did not participate in management. Since 2015, three of his brothers had constituted the company’s entire board.
Held: The High Court held that the unfairness ground was established. The directors had acted in their own interests by maintaining and increasing related-party loans that benefited companies in which they collectively held larger interests, making no attempt to recover the loans, and causing Senfu to assume another related company’s expenses. Their conduct was also unfair and unjust to the other…
Background: Stephen Maynus filed a civil complaint containing five counts. After one count had previously been dismissed, the Washington Unit Civil Division dismissed his remaining claims on March 25, 2026. Maynus filed a May 27 notice of appeal limited to Counts 2 through 4; that appeal remained pending.
Held: The Vermont Supreme Court denied the motion to vacate. It explained that appellees had a reasonable opportunity to present their position during the earlier motion practice, Maynus did not show that they were prejudiced by a ruling in their favor, and Vermont Rule of Appellate Procedure 27(b) permitted the Court to decide a procedural motion without awaiting a response.
Background: Connecticut charged Devoni Miller with several offenses, including murder, arising from events in Cromwell on or about September 11, 2023. Because murder is punishable by life imprisonment, the Connecticut Constitution and General Statutes § 54-46a required a hearing and a judicial finding of probable cause before Miller could be required to stand trial.
Held: The Connecticut Supreme Court granted the state's motion and dismissed the appeal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Relying on State v. Atkins and the final-judgment test established in State v. Curcio, the court held that a trial court's probable-cause determination is not a final judgment that may be appealed immediately.
Background: Jennifer Owen sued Town and Country Federal Credit Union under the Maine Human Rights Act after it terminated her employment in October 2018. She alleged that the credit union discriminated against her because of her history of breast cancer and perceived recurrence, and retaliated against her for requesting time for a medical appointment. A jury…
Held: The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed. It held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by retaining the attorney-fee and cost sanction after declining to give an adverse-inference instruction. The monetary sanction rested not only on alleged spoliation, but also on Owen’s separate discovery failures, including evasive and misleading responses, delayed production, and failure to comply with a…
Background: AB and CD, formerly husband and wife, had been involved in extensive Family Court proceedings. The present Supreme Court proceedings were factually and procedurally connected with those proceedings and concerned, principally, confidential information belonging to AB. Rampert News Pty Ltd and its journalist Ben Butler were also defendants.
Held: Justice Kunc continued the pseudonym orders because publishing the parties’ names could allow the public to identify people connected with the related Family Court proceedings, potentially resulting in a breach of s 114Q of the Family Law Act 1975. That provision criminalizes public communication of an account of proceedings under the Act when the account identifies a party or another…
Background: Quinlee Jenkins appealed a September 9, 2026 Family Court order in a dispute with Aaron Jordan. The Delaware Supreme Court concluded from the notice of appeal that Jenkins appeared to be seeking review of an interlocutory order.
Held: The Delaware Supreme Court dismissed the appeal under Supreme Court Rules 3(b) and 29(b).
Background: Franklin County Children Services received a June 2022 referral reporting that C.S. and her infant daughter, R.K., were living in a vacant garage that lacked basic utilities and contained drug paraphernalia and swords. R.K. had scratches and a cigarette burn on her chest, which C.S. acknowledged occurred while she was holding the child. The juvenile…
Held: The Tenth District affirmed. It held that sufficient evidence supported the juvenile court’s findings and that the permanent-custody judgment was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Although case-plan compliance is relevant to a child’s best interests, substantial compliance does not require denial of permanent custody. The record supported the finding that C.S. had not substantially completed key objectives…
Background: A jury convicted Rico Cordell Dixon of conspiring to distribute methamphetamine and two counts of possessing methamphetamine with intent to distribute. It acquitted him of another drug count and two firearm counts. In a special interrogatory, the jury attributed to the conspiracy at least 50 but less than 500 grams of a substance containing methamphetamine.
Held: The Eighth Circuit affirmed the convictions. It held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting Dixon’s prior convictions because his knowledge and intent were material issues after he denied knowing about the drugs and firearm and sought to blame others. His stipulation that he knew he was a felon did not remove those issues from the…