Richard Gittins

A High Court ruling spared the grandchildren of Thomas the Tank Engine creator Wilbert Awdry from a significant tax bill after HMRC argued unsuccessfully that royalties paid into a trust should be treated as income. The judge determined that the royalties constituted capital assets of the trust rather than income, emphasizing that they were derived from copyrights assigned by Awdry before his death. The decision protects the trust from potential income tax liabilities of up to 45 percent, concluding that the settlement’s language and trust law principles supported classifying the royalties as capital.

Two British stunt performers, Theo Morton and Douglas Robson, are suing MARV Bespoke Productions for £200,000, claiming unauthorised use of footage featuring their stunt work in Elton John’s Farewell Yellow Brick Road tour. They argue their contracts entitled them to royalties and compensation for any new use of the film material, which was taken from Kingsman: The Golden Circle and shown during more than 300 live performances and streaming broadcasts. MARV denies wrongdoing, stating the performers’ rights were assigned and that another company licensed the clips to 20th Century Fox without MARV receiving any payment. The court will determine whether the footage’s use constituted a new use, whether MARV authorised it, and whether any contractual obligations were breached.

Robert Ebert, a former senior Deutsche Bank executive convicted in Hong Kong for causing the death of a security guard in 2015, is seeking to sue Ferrari, claiming the crash resulted from brake failure in his Ferrari 458 Spider. He has launched a pre-action bid in the High Court in London to obtain documents he says could show Ferrari knew of braking issues later linked to recalls in the US and China. Ferrari is opposing the application, arguing that any disclosure should be sought through courts in Hong Kong or Italy and rejecting any connection between later recalls and the 2015 crash. The court has yet to decide on the request.

A judge upheld Terrance Pammen’s 2016 will, which left his estate to daughter Tracy and granddaughter Paige, rejecting son Gary Pammen’s claim that their father lacked testamentary capacity. The court found no evidence supporting Gary’s allegations and said his belief was driven by confirmation bias. Claims that Tracy and Paige made improper withdrawals from Terrance’s accounts were dismissed. Gary was ordered to pay £216,013.85 in legal costs, with £150,000 due upfront.

A Lincolnshire house listing was removed from Rightmove and Zoopla after photos and a 360‑degree video revealed a large collection of Nazi memorabilia in one of the rooms. The property, marketed by Purple Bricks, initially replaced the images but failed to update the video, prompting online criticism and comparisons to a well‑known Father Ted episode. The listing was eventually taken down following widespread attention.

A High Court lawsuit seeks more than £1 million in damages from United Utilities after a 2020 wildfire on Darwen Moor spread onto David Livesey’s Lords Hall Estate, destroying extensive conservation work and grouse habitats. Livesey argues the company failed to take reasonable fire‑prevention and firefighting measures, prioritising its own land and neglecting to build protective firebreaks. United Utilities denies liability, citing that the fire began with a disposable barbecue lit by two local men, that the moor was subject to agricultural tenancies, and that Lancashire Fire and Rescue Service directed the response. The case examines responsibility for fire mitigation and land management on the moor; proceedings remain ongoing.

A widow is suing artisan producer The Old Cheese Room for more than £200,000 after her husband, Roger Parkes, died from a listeria infection traced to a Baronet cheese included in a Valentine gift box. An inquest concluded the cheese was contaminated due to manufacturing issues, though the company disputes liability, arguing Parkes' pre-existing health conditions could have caused his death. Legal filings outline the timeline of the illness, the subsequent product recall, and the company’s challenge to both causation and the level of damages. The case is set for a pre-trial hearing unless settled beforehand.

A tribunal upheld the government’s refusal to grant an exemption allowing art collector Victor James to sell Eileen Agar’s 1930s sculpture containing a 165-year-old elephant tusk. The judge ruled that the sculpture must be assessed as a whole under the Ivory Act, meaning it cannot qualify for the pre‑1918 exemption despite the tusk’s age. The decision emphasized preventing loopholes that could enable laundering modern ivory through incorporation into new artworks.

A High Court judge dismissed Amanda Navaian’s £6m lawsuit against the King Charles III Charitable Trust, Dori Dana-Haeri and most claims against FareShare, ruling she failed to prove any binding oral contract for a planned fundraising dinner and T‑shirt launch. The judge found no evidence the charities caused the cancellation of the event at CLAP London and said the alleged contractual promises were unrealistic and unlikely to have been agreed. Only a small claim for up to £25,000 in reimbursable expenses against FareShare was allowed to proceed, with the remainder of her claims struck out.

A widower is seeking more than £200,000 in compensation from Happy Days Retro Vacations Limited after his wife, barrister Ruth Pingree, died in a 2022 glamping-site fire in Suffolk. Court filings allege that a defective smoke alarm and inadequate risk assessments contributed to her death, while the company denies liability, arguing safety measures were sufficient and suggesting the victim’s intoxication impaired her ability to escape. The inquest found the fire likely began outside the caravan, possibly from campfire embers or a cigarette, and spread rapidly, trapping the family. The campsite has since closed, and the case is expected to proceed to a pre-trial hearing unless a settlement is reached.

A judge ruled that Susan Hickenbotham and her daughter Claire Noble fraudulently obtained more than £200,000 in housing benefits over 19 years by creating sham tenancy agreements that concealed Ms Hickenbotham’s true ownership of a home in Romford. The decision arose from a family dispute in which Ms Hickenbotham unsuccessfully claimed she had been coerced into signing over the property. The judge upheld the validity of the 2019 deed transferring the home to Claire, granted Ms Hickenbotham a 10 percent interest based on her contributions, and stated he would refer the fraud to authorities, while confirming that Matthew Selt and Charlotte Hamblin were not involved.

A long-running boundary dispute between councillor David Todd and neighbours Richard and Rebecca Marsh has returned to the High Court after a 2025 ruling granted the Marshes ownership of a half‑acre strip and access path based on Land Registry boundaries. Todd and partner Caroline Hodge argue the existing dog‑proof fence was presented as the true boundary when they bought their East Sussex home and claim a binding boundary agreement was made with the previous owner. The Marshes counter that the fence was misplaced, the couple declined to buy the adjoining land when offered, and no agreement existed. The High Court has reserved judgment following arguments over the validity of the fence line and the alleged boundary agreement.

A long‑running inheritance dispute between the Bowerman brothers concluded with Alastair Bowerman being ordered to pay about £875,000 in legal costs after unsuccessfully challenging his parents’ 1999 wills. Although the judge agreed their father lacked testamentary capacity at the time, Alastair’s 18‑year delay in bringing the claim led to it being barred. His allegations of undue influence regarding his mother’s will were also dismissed. The ruling leaves him owing costs that exceed the value of the estate.

A High Court judge allowed Elizabeth Fortescue to reverse a mistaken transfer of her life interest in £4.4 million of Boconnoc Estate property that triggered a £1.2 million inheritance tax bill. The ruling prevents the family from having to sell estate assets to cover the tax charge. The court found that although Fortescue had received correct initial advice, the method used to complete the transfer was flawed, creating an unintended 20 percent tax liability. The order sets aside the deeds involved, preserving the future of the historic Cornish estate.

An Army nurse seeks more than £1.2m in damages, alleging racist bullying and a hostile environment at RAF Brize Norton led to severe mental health deterioration and his eventual discharge from service. The Ministry of Defence disputes the allegations and requires strict proof of the claimed incidents, including the alleged racist gesture and impact on his career and wellbeing. The High Court has scheduled a future 10-day trial due to the case’s complexity.

A neurosurgeon is seeking more than £200,000 in damages after a lift at the Royal London Hospital malfunctioned and dropped several floors, causing severe leg injuries and psychological trauma. His employer, Barts Health NHS Trust, admits a breach of duty but challenges aspects of the claim, including causation and the level of compensation. The trust has requested delaying the case until the long‑term medical outlook becomes clearer.

A legal dispute has emerged after barrister Tom Grayson Ford and his wife accused former fashion director Paula Reed of misrepresenting the condition of a £5.5 million Notting Hill home, alleging prior flooding, leaks and a mouse infestation. The couple argue the issues must have predated the sale and are seeking rescission of the transaction or over £1 million in damages. Reed denies any knowledge of defects and maintains that her pre‑contractual statements were true, attributing the kitchen leak to changes made by the buyers and describing damp in the basement as longstanding and visible. A High Court judge has ordered an expert surveyor to assess the property’s condition at the time of completion, with a future trial pending unless the case settles.

A High Court ruling determined that 17-year-old Gabrielle Barbus, who died by suicide, will be cremated according to the wishes of his mother and older brother rather than buried as requested by his father. The judge concluded that cremation aligned more closely with Gabrielle’s expressed views and his relationship with his mother, finding that the father’s request reflected his own religious beliefs rather than his son’s. The court also accepted that scattering the ashes in Devon would be consistent with Gabrielle’s personality and preferences. Condolences were extended to the family, and no order for costs was made.

A High Court ruling determined that Sheikh Mohamed Bin Issa Al Jaber is both the legal and beneficial owner of an £8.3 million London home, rejecting arguments by his wife, Makiyah Al Jaber, that the property belonged to her under Islamic custom, constructive trust, or proprietary estoppel. The decision allows liquidators of the sheikh’s collapsed company to charge the property against an £80 million debt. The judge found no evidence of a binding custom or detrimental reliance, and ordered the couple to jointly pay significant legal costs, with a potential future sale of the home still to be decided.

A High Court judge is weighing a dispute between divorced parents over whether their 17‑year‑old son, who died by suicide, should be buried or cremated. The father seeks burial based on his Orthodox Christian beliefs, while the mother argues for cremation and scattering the ashes in nature, reflecting what she believes would align with her son’s wishes. With no evidence of the teenager’s own preference, the court must balance the parents’ conflicting views and the need for a respectful and timely resolution of the remains. The decision has been reserved for a later date.

A Court of Appeal panel upheld a ruling that set aside the original divorce settlement between Maria-Christina Copinger-Symes and her ex-husband, Major James Copinger-Symes, after finding he failed to disclose an expected £27.6m gift from her mother. The judges determined that the omission materially distorted the financial picture presented during the divorce, allowing Maria-Christina to pursue a claim to a portion of the funds. Appeals by both the ex-husband and the wife’s mother, who argued the money was a non‑matrimonial gift intended solely for him, were dismissed, allowing the financial order to be reconsidered.

A long‑running neighbour dispute over parking on a shared driveway resulted in Marie Potter losing her £575,000 home after failing to pay court‑ordered damages and costs to neighbour Kirsten McGowan. Following an earlier judgment, the debt was secured against the property, leading to an enforced sale and Potter’s eviction in 2023. Potter’s High Court challenge claiming the sale order was invalid was dismissed, with the judge ruling the county court had the authority to order the sale because the debt was within its £350,000 equity jurisdiction limit.

A High Court ruling dismissed Lonan O’Herlihy’s claim for £5 million from the £38 million estate of Hugh Taylor, determining that Taylor had no financial responsibility toward him after 2012 and that O’Herlihy was capable of supporting himself. The court found no basis for his claim of expected inheritance and rejected arguments that his standard of living should reflect his upbringing. As a result, he was ordered to pay more than £2 million in legal costs, including fees for the widow’s legal team and his own representation. The decision concluded that he had no realistic prospect of success, even had the claim been filed on time.

A long-running neighbour dispute over parking on a shared driveway led to Marie Potter losing her Croydon home after a county court ordered her to pay costs and later approved its sale to settle the debt. Potter, now living in rented accommodation, is challenging the order at the High Court, arguing the county court lacked jurisdiction because the property had a charge exceeding £30,000. She seeks to overturn the order and claim more than £250,000 in compensation. Lawyers for neighbour Kirsten McGowan argue the sale order was valid under legislation permitting higher limits. The judge has reserved his decision.

A retired couple and their neighbour were awarded significant damages after a court ruled a new tower at the Bankside Yards development substantially reduced light to their homes, but they now face a £3.7m legal bill because their request for an injunction to alter or demolish the tower was rejected. The developer argues it was the successful party since it avoided injunctive relief, while the claimants insist they succeeded by securing record damages in a rights‑to‑light case. The judge had previously ruled that demolition would unnecessarily waste over £200m and cause major environmental harm. A decision on legal costs will follow.

A long‑running neighbour dispute in Shropshire ended with the High Court upholding a ruling that 80‑year‑old shepherdess Muriel Whiston must pay substantial legal costs after a conflict over gates on a shared track. Judges found that her signage and forthright behaviour substantially interfered with Peter and Kelly Leonard’s right of way, though the gates themselves could remain. Both sides’ appeals were dismissed, and the court criticised the disproportionate time and money spent on the case.

A High Court judgment found that Sophie Perhar caused the collapse of The Sustainable Bathroom Company by using funds intended for lender Synergy in Trade to pay personal and family expenses, including her children's school fees. Perhar alleged that finance chief David Slinger acted vindictively by placing the company into administration after a dispute, but the judge ruled that Synergy acted to protect its financial position following misdirected Aldi payments and repeated unauthorised withdrawals. Claims of improper motive and inappropriate conduct were rejected, and the court confirmed that the administration must stand due to the company's liabilities and lack of trading activity.

A High Court judge ruled that a forged will and fake marriage certificate presented by Cengiz Arif were fraudulent attempts to claim the estate of Kassy Sinar, who left her assets in trust for her daughter in a valid 2022 will. The court removed Arif as executor, froze his access to estate assets, and ordered him to pay substantial legal costs. Authorities confirmed no lawful marriage existed, and evidence, including handwriting analysis, showed the 2023 will was falsified. The ruling secures control of the estate for Sinar’s family, who now act as guardians for her daughter.

A legal battle has erupted between motor trade tycoon Peter Waddell and private equity investor Freshstream after Waddell was removed as CEO of Big Motoring World. Waddell alleges he was unfairly dismissed through a deliberate plot to seize control of the company and strip its assets, arguing his disabilities were ignored during an internal disciplinary process. Freshstream maintains it acted legitimately under a contractual step-in clause following complaints about racist, sexist and abusive comments. Court submissions outline Waddell’s claims of unfair procedure, financial decline at the company since his removal, and increased consumer complaints. He seeks reinstatement, damages for wrongful dismissal and an order forcing the investor to sell its shares to him at fair value. The hearing is ongoing.

A lorry driver is suing Specsavers for over £200,000, alleging that inaccurate eye test results led to the loss of his HGV licence and caused severe depression and anxiety. After two failed visual field tests in 2022, the DVLA revoked his licence, though it was reinstated months later following an ophthalmologist’s assessment. His barrister claims negligence by Specsavers staff produced false results and an incorrect report to the DVLA. The driver asserts lasting psychological harm and inability to work, supported by a medical report. Specsavers says it will defend the claim.

A railway station manager, David Gibson, is suing Southeastern for £1m, alleging he contracted Covid-19 from his coughing supervisor during an office visit and breakfast meeting in July 2021, ultimately leading to severe illness and the amputation of his leg. His legal team argues that his manager ignored Covid safety policies and attended work while symptomatic. Southeastern denies liability, asserting its policies were appropriate, that the manager had no recognizable Covid symptoms at the time, and that Gibson contributed to his own risk by remaining in the office and attending breakfast. The case has reached a pre-trial hearing and may proceed to full trial unless settled.

Judges in the Upper Tribunal ruled that severe hair loss in women can constitute a disability, allowing specialist wigs made by Mark Glenn Ltd to qualify for zero‑rated VAT. The court rejected HMRC’s argument that baldness is merely cosmetic, finding that the social and psychological impact of hair loss can significantly affect everyday activities. The decision reverses an earlier First Tier Tribunal ruling and removes a £277,000 VAT bill for the company, with the judges concluding that the bespoke fitting and maintenance of the wigs constitutes the adaptation of goods for disabled individuals.

A former Goldman Sachs banker, Leda Sara, is being sued by neighbours Samuel and Jennifer Wagner for over £100,000 over alleged leaks and renovation-related issues in her Knightsbridge flat, which they say caused repeated damage and forced them to move out three times. The Wagners claim additional financial losses after a property sale collapsed when they could not obtain timely proof that leaks had been fixed. Sara denies liability, arguing the problems stem from independent contractors and that the law does not make landowners responsible for such third‑party actions. The court is considering whether she bears responsibility for the alleged nuisance, with Sara also pursuing indemnity from one of her contractors.

A High Court kinship inquiry is assessing competing claims to the £2.7m estate of McDonald Noel, a Trinidad-born London bachelor who died intestate in 2018. Heir hunters identified possible relatives from the UK and Caribbean, sparking a dispute over whether several claimants descend from Noel’s father, Stanley Dorant. Evidence presented includes DNA results, historical documents and testimony concerning Stanley’s relationships in Barbados and Trinidad. Lawyers for different branches of the family contest the legitimacy of claims by Clyde and St Clair’s descendants, while others assert that all four men—McDonald, Clyde, St Clair and Francis—shared the same father. The judge will issue a ruling at a later date.

A High Court judge invalidated Laxmikant Patel’s 2021 will, ruling it suspicious and improperly executed, and reinstated his 2019 will dividing the estate roughly equally between his three children. The decision leaves eldest daughter Anju Patel, who benefited almost entirely under the later will, liable for her sister Bhavenetta Stewart‑Brown’s legal costs of over £450,000 plus her own expenses, wiping out her inheritance. Executor Vijaykant Patel was also found jointly liable. The judge refused permission to appeal.

A primary school teacher’s £60,000 compensation claim against Go Ape was dismissed after a severe leg fracture sustained on a children’s slide at the company’s Black Park site. The court accepted Go Ape’s position that the slide was professionally installed, regularly inspected and carried inherent risks typical of adventure activities. Judge Luke Ashby ruled that only a small number of minor incidents had been reported out of roughly 100,000 uses, concluding the slide was reasonably safe and that the injury, though serious, resulted from the inherent risks of such attractions.

A High Court kin inquiry determined that only three children—McDonald, St Clair and Francis—were the biological offspring of Stanley Dorant, resolving competing inheritance claims to McDonald Noel’s £2m estate. Judge Katherine McQuail ruled that cousins Shaka and Desiree Dorant are entitled to inherit, supported by evidence of Stanley’s presence and relationships in the Caribbean during the relevant periods. Claims by descendants of Clyde and Stella were dismissed due to insufficient evidence of paternity, allowing the estate to be distributed among the descendants of Stanley’s confirmed children.

A High Court ruling determined that WhatsApp messages sent by Audun Mar Gudmundsson did not constitute a legally valid signed document transferring his share of a £1.5m London home to his ex‑wife, Hsiao Mei‑Lin. The judge found that the name displayed in the message header was generated by the app and did not qualify as a signature, and that the message content suggested negotiation toward a future divorce settlement rather than an immediate transfer of ownership. As a result, trustees handling Gudmundsson’s bankruptcy successfully appealed to reduce the time Lin may remain in the property, requiring her to leave by July 2027.

HMRC has won a tax tribunal ruling requiring Morrisons to pay £17 million in VAT on rotisserie chickens sold between 2017 and 2020. The tribunal found that the chickens were sold in heat‑retentive, greaseproof bags, making them subject to the standard rate despite earlier inspections. Morrisons argued it had a legitimate expectation based on past guidance and full transparency with inspectors, but the judge ruled the supermarket failed to disclose key details about the packaging. Morrisons may now pursue judicial review in the High Court.

A British court ruled in favor of Lucasfilm and its Disney-owned affiliates, striking out Tyburn Film Productions’ £250,000 claim over the digital recreation of Peter Cushing in Rogue One. Tyburn argued that a 1993 contract gave it veto rights over reproducing Cushing’s image using special effects, but the court determined that the companies used recordings from the original 1977 Star Wars film, for which they already held rights. Lady Carr found no legal basis for Tyburn’s claim of unjust enrichment, concluding that no rights belonging to Tyburn were transferred to the Disney companies.

A High Court hearing detailed reality TV personality Lonan O'Herlihy’s claim that an aggressive legal battle with the widow of multimillionaire Hugh Taylor has left him homeless, indebted, and estranged from his long-term partner. O’Herlihy is seeking £5 million from Taylor’s £38 million estate under the Inheritance Act, arguing he had a father–son relationship with Taylor and was financially supported throughout his youth. Jennifer Taylor disputes the claim as opportunistic, highlighting his requested assets and arguing an adult has no entitlement to such a lifestyle. The court heard allegations of O’Herlihy being gradually excluded from Taylor’s life after his marriage to Jennifer, as well as disputes regarding his public image versus his actual financial state. O’Herlihy is also requesting permission to bring the claim after missing the statutory deadline.

A legal dispute has arisen over the £38 million estate of businessman Hugh Taylor as Lonan O’Herlihy seeks £5 million, arguing Taylor acted as a father figure and supported him financially during childhood. Taylor’s widow, Jennifer Taylor, contests the claim as opportunistic, pointing to O’Herlihy’s extensive demands and financial independence. Court arguments focus on whether O’Herlihy is entitled to maintenance under the Inheritance Act and whether his claim, filed years after the deadline, should be permitted. The hearing remains ongoing.

A woman excluded from her late father’s £1.75m will is challenging the decision in London’s High Court, arguing for reasonable financial provision based on their renewed relationship and her family’s significant health and financial needs. Her stepmother, sole beneficiary of the will, opposes the claim, arguing the deceased never intended to provide for his adult children and that the estate reflects both spouses’ joint efforts. A decision will be issued after the two‑day hearing.

A couple received £16,504 in compensation after the luxury yurt hired for their wedding collapsed a day before the event, forcing them to use an overcrowded marquee. A judge ruled that Yorkshire Yurts Limited breached its contract by failing to properly erect the structure and not providing adequate remedial support. The collapse caused significant distress, particularly to the bride, and the payout included £10,000 for emotional impact. The court rejected the company’s claim that high winds justified withdrawal or that the yurt was usable on the wedding day.

A senior health and safety executive, Glyn Caddick, is suing Beauty Bay and GXO Logistics for millions after falling three storeys in a Salford warehouse in 2022, suffering life‑changing injuries. He argues the guardrail was too low and breached safety regulations, while both companies deny liability, claiming he caused his own fall by leaning out or climbing on shelving to take a photo. Legal representatives dispute how the fall occurred, and an engineering expert will examine the railing setup and mechanics of the fall ahead of a full trial. Caddick described his long recovery and ongoing limitations following nine months in hospital.

A High Court ruling removed trustees Paddy Campbell and Malcolm Taylor from overseeing the £8.2 million estate of veterinary medical tycoon Graham Cheslyn-Curtis after the judge found their hostility toward his stepchildren, Leah-Jane Styring and Nathan Smith, risked compromising the trust’s proper administration. The siblings, whom Cheslyn-Curtis had intended to guide into leadership roles at Millpledge, were previously dismissed from the company amid tensions over profit-sharing caps and accusations of entitlement. The court maintained family members Sarah Cheslyn-Curtis and Maldyn Worsley-Tonks as trustees and ordered the appointment of a professional trustee to ensure impartial management.

A dance teacher won a liability judgment against TYP International after a Goa yoga training course triggered a severe psychological breakdown, leaving her unable to work. The company, run by Jamie Clarke and Dulce Aguilar, dropped its defence due to lack of funds and legal representation. Court filings describe an emotionally intense exercise that allegedly retraumatised the claimant, leading to diagnoses including complex PTSD and functional neurological disorder. The High Court struck out the defence, and damages will be determined in the next phase.

A High Court judge dismissed Andrew Grijns’ £2.6 million claim against his mother over a Chelsea townhouse, ruling that he had no entitlement to the property and had lived there for decades simply because it suited him. The judge criticised him as self‑absorbed and found his account of parental promises implausible. Grijns was declared a trespasser from August 2023 and was ordered to leave, pay his mother £85,000 per year for remaining in the house, cover rent he collected, and face more than £1 million in legal costs.

A guest is suing glampsite owners Guy and Alison Lubbock for more than £700,000 after suffering a burst spinal fracture when a zipline handle failed at the Adhurst Yurts estate in 2022. While the owners and their insurer NFU Mutual admit liability for the accident, they strongly dispute the extent of Jonathan Sharpe’s claimed losses, including requests for first‑class travel, childcare, and home maintenance costs. Court filings show continued disagreement over the severity of Sharpe’s long‑term needs, and the case has not yet been scheduled for a hearing.

A business dispute at London’s Arcadia Games has escalated into legal action involving allegations of inappropriate behaviour, claims of a hostile takeover, and disagreements over company ownership and finances. Raonaid Adrianna Ryn accuses her ex‑husband Alexander Forsyth of breaching the club’s conduct rules, while he and his wife Madeleine Wilson deny wrongdoing and say they were unlawfully excluded from the business. Both sides allege financial misconduct by the other, and after initial court negotiations they agreed to attempt mediation, with the possibility of a trial next year if unresolved.

A High Court ruling found Turney and Sue Logan liable for a 2018 fire that destroyed their home and that of neighbour Christopher Stanley-Smith, after unsafe, decades-old DIY wiring to a shed freezer caused the blaze. The judge determined the couple failed in their duty of care by not having the amateur installation checked by an electrician, concluding that rodent damage to the unsuitable extension lead likely caused the fire. Stanley-Smith was awarded £350,000 in damages.

A High Court ruling determined that nearly £100,000 raised for treatment for Kyle Morrison, a child who died from DIPG cancer, cannot be redirected to support his terminally ill sister, Ruby-Rose. The judge found that donors had intended the funds for children with DIPG or related research, consistent with statements made during fundraising. The charity Gold Geese will divide the remaining money between two DIPG charities after recouping legal fees, while offering sympathy to the family.

A neurosurgeon’s £14m claim against McLaren Automotive was dismissed after a UK judge ruled he caused his own snowmobile crash during a Lapland driving experience. Evidence showed he sought higher speeds and later told staff the accident was his responsibility. The court found the safety briefing adequate and rejected allegations of negligence by McLaren’s guides, concluding the surgeon mistakenly accelerated while negotiating a turn.

A £43m inheritance battle has reached London’s High Court as Adam Scott challenges two final wills made by his father, Richard Scott, a wealthy Cheshire farmer and car boot sale operator who fathered 19 children. Adam argues his father lacked mental capacity when he disinherited him and claims long‑standing promises entitling him to take over the family farm. Richard’s widow, Jennifer Scott, denies this, saying Richard deliberately cut Adam out after their relationship deteriorated and asserting he had previously gifted Adam over £10m in land. The case examines alleged assurances, decades of work on the farm, family conflicts, and Richard’s declining mental health, with proprietary estoppel central to Adam’s alternative claim.

A High Court dispute centers on the £413,000 estate of tattoo artist Dennis Cockell, contested by his widow, Fong Yuet Cockell, and his newly confirmed daughter, Cindylee Cockell of Australia. Cindylee seeks financial provision and a valuable tattoo flash sheet, citing severe depression and inability to work following her parents’ deaths. The widow disputes her claims, arguing Cindylee can work and that a payout would force her to sell her home. Judges heard evidence regarding Cockell’s career, family history, and the financial circumstances of both sides, with a ruling expected later.

A neighbour dispute over a fence narrowing a shared path led an Oxford County Court judge to reject claims of nuisance by Helen Faber and Dominic Miles and instead order them to remove part of their patio and an oil pipe deemed to trespass on Richard and Katherine Reid’s property. The couple appealed to the High Court, arguing prior neighbours had accepted the oil system and that the fence significantly interfered with their use of the path. The Reids’ legal team maintained the fence caused no substantial obstruction and that both the oil line and patio were unlawful encroachments. A ruling from the High Court is pending.

A legal battle has erupted between explorer Henry Cookson’s adventure travel company and billionaire heiress Karen Lo over a cancelled 2018 expedition to visit the Titanic wreck aboard OceanGate’s Titan submersible. Lo, who paid about £670,000, argues she is entitled to a refund after the trip was cancelled and never realised, citing the Package Travel Regulations. Cookson’s firm disputes this, claiming Lo accepted a no-refund agreement and was offered credit for later voyages, which she declined. The case also references OceanGate’s later fatal 2023 submersible implosion, which ended further missions. Unless resolved, the dispute will proceed to court.

Milanka Brooks is seeking up to £100,000 in damages from SportsDirect.Com Fitness after her mother, Mileva Brooks, died from heatstroke following a collapse in a sauna at an Everlast gym in Cheltenham. A 2023 inquest found the 75-year-old former model died from the effects of heatstroke, with paramedics recording a body temperature of 39.2°C. The lawsuit, filed in the High Court, claims personal injury and damages under the Fatal Accidents Act. The gym chain, owned by Frasers Group, had expanded after acquiring former DW Sports Fitness locations. The company’s defence was unavailable at the time of reporting.

A YouTube influencer is suing Harley Street surgeon Dr Domenico Mileto for £1.7m, alleging that oversized breast implants left her disfigured, in pain, and unable to continue her social‑media career. Danielle Mansutti claims she was not properly advised about implant size risks and that the procedures caused muscle damage and long‑term cosmetic issues. Her legal team argues she lost significant potential earnings and required further corrective surgery. Dr Mileto denies the implants were too large, asserting she requested the size and was given options. The case involves disputed issues of consent, surgical judgment, and causation, and is set for a five‑day High Court trial with multiple experts expected to testify.

A buyer of a £1.5 million Versace‑designed apartment in London is suing the developer for more than £700,000 after discovering discrepancies between the marketed plans and the finished property, including a missing bathtub, reduced bedroom size and layout changes. Mi Suk Park claims the alterations breached the purchase contract and constituted misrepresentation, arguing she relied on the brochure and floor plan when making the off‑plan purchase. Developer Nine Elms Property Ltd denies wrongdoing, asserting the materials were illustrative and that her deposit was forfeited when she refused to complete. The ongoing court case centers on whether the layout changes were material and whether the developer acted within contractual terms.

A retired couple and a neighbour are suing the developers of the £35m Arbor tower at Bankside Yards, arguing that the building significantly reduces natural light in their flats and seeking an injunction that could require demolition unless design changes are made. Their legal team argues that the development wrongfully prioritised its own light levels at their expense, while the developer, Ludgate House Ltd, denies any actionable interference and claims the plaintiffs are seeking a ransom payment. The company argues that any reduction in light is minor, the flats remain valuable, and demolition would be wasteful, offering instead compensation based on diminished property value. The High Court continues to hear arguments over whether an injunction or damages should apply.

A woman is seeking nearly £50,000 in damages after allegedly suffering permanent facial scarring from a laser hair removal procedure at a Wembley clinic. Court filings argue excessive heat caused burns and lasting psychological effects, while the clinic maintains she was warned of the risks and disputes negligence. A judge has permitted expert evidence on physical and psychological impact, and a three‑day trial is scheduled for next year.

A long‑running family conflict has escalated into a court battle between sports doctor Sonia Bains, her sister Sharn, and their mother Camilla over the ownership of an £800,000 house in Sutton and £340,000 from Camilla’s divorce settlement. Camilla claims the house and funds were held on trust for her, while her daughters argue the money was gifted and that Sonia owns the property outright, asserting that a declaration of trust was signed under coercion. Both sides accuse the other of financial misconduct, with Camilla seeking possession of the home and repayment of funds and the sisters requesting dismissal of her claims and repayment of alleged loans. The case continues.

A woman who sued for more than £400,000 over an arm injury allegedly caused by a fall from a horse lost her case after surveillance footage showed her engaging in physical activities that contradicted her claimed disability. The High Court ruled that although she exaggerated her symptoms, the dishonesty was not significant enough to be deemed fundamental, sparing her from liability for legal costs. The judge found she failed to prove the horse behaved dangerously under the Animals Act 1971, concluding the incident was not caused by a perceived threat. The claim was dismissed.

A trainee lawyer is suing cosmetic surgeon Mike Comins for £75,000, alleging that Vaser liposuction left her with uneven contours, scarring and psychological harm. She claims she was promised an ideal cosmetic result and not adequately informed of risks, arguing she would not have consented otherwise. The defence denies wrongdoing, asserting she received warnings detailing possible adverse outcomes and was advised to temper expectations. The High Court has adjourned the pre-trial hearing, with a full trial to follow.

A court overturned a 2022 divorce settlement after finding that James Copinger-Symes likely knew he would receive over £27 million in gifts from his ex-wife’s estranged parents before the agreement was reached. Maria-Christina Copinger-Symes, formerly INXS’s European manager, learned that her wealthy parents had cut her off, sided with her ex-husband, and transferred substantial funds to him without her knowledge. Judge Edward Hess ruled that the husband’s non-disclosure of the expected gifts constituted a material factor that would have significantly altered the settlement. The case will return to the Family Court, with Ms Copinger-Symes now seeking around £14 million from her ex-husband.

A woman who believed she had won over £1 million on Paddy Power’s Wild Hatter online slot is suing the company after receiving only £20,265. Paddy Power argues a random number generator, not the on‑screen jackpot wheel, determines outcomes and that a mapping error caused misleading animations. Her legal team says the terms and conditions were unclear, conflicted with game rules, and violate consumer protections, while the judge questioned the fairness of the system. A decision on the request to strike out Paddy Power’s defence is pending.