Lawdit Solicitors Law Firm logo

The Ultimate Guide to Judicial Review

  • Categories: Litigation
  • Vlad Krupski
  • August 4, 2023

Scope and application of judicial review

Judicial review is the process by which courts exercise supervisory jurisdiction over the performance of public functions by public authorities. CPR 54.1 states that

“application for judicial review” means a request to review the lawfulness of

  • of a legal act or
  • decision, act or omission in connection with the exercise of a public function”.

Judicial review proceedings in England and Wales usually occur in the Administrative Court, part of the Royal Bench Division of the High Court. The Upper Tribunal also has limited judicial review jurisdiction.

The court may make the following orders following the hearing:

  • a quashing order
  • a prohibitory order
  • a mandatory order
  • in specified circumstances, a declaration or injunction, or an award of damages

Judicial review does not ultimately change the decision. This is because the court cannot assume the powers of state authorities. The claimant has the right to apply for damages during the judicial review. This must be clearly stated in the statement of claim.

Grounds for Judicial Review

Lord Diplock classified the basic principles underlying judicial review . These are interrelated principles that include legality, reasonableness and fairness. They have been subdivided for efficiency as follows:

  • illegality/error of law – A public authority must understand and comply with the law governing its actions. It must act following the letter of the law strictly follow it and use it by its main purpose and its content.
  • irrationality/unreasonableness – also known as “Wednesbury unreasonableness”, after the seminal case on this issue, it became one of the grounds for judicial review. It is quite difficult and complex to prove and consists in proving by the plaintiff that the decision is so unclear that no human being could have made it. Usually, the difficulty and reluctance to intervene in this case will be since the court is rather cautious about issues of specialised knowledge and policy, as it is at the interface between judicial activity and interference in the affairs of state bodies.
  • Procedural impropriety/unfairness – also known as “natural justice”, which is procedural fairness depending on all the case circumstances. The basis of procedural justice is the right to be heard without bias and discrimination.
  • breach of legitimate expectation – expressed in procedural impropriety- now constitutes a separate ground for judicial review. This principle may occur when a public authority has promised or, in accordance with clear policy and practice, should have obtained one result. Still, it was not obtained due to unreasonable grounds.

Judicial Review

Judicial review procedure

The main rules governing the judicial review process are:

1) section 31 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981) (as amended by Part 4 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 (CJCA 2015))

2) CPR 54 (which modifies CPR 8)

3) CPR PD 54A

Other CPR provisions relating to court costs and certain limitations on the court’s powers in these cases may also apply.

The court must first consider several issues to allow the case to proceed to trial, namely:

1)      whether the case is subject to judicial review

2)      whether the relevant alternative remedies have been exhausted

3)      whether the parties have tried to resolve the dispute by other means

4)      whether there is still time to file a claim for judicial review.

There is also a court protocol for judicial review, which aims to help the parties

–          understand and identify the issues, exchange information and documents

–          make an informed decision on whether and how to proceed

–          try to settle the dispute or limit the scope of the issues

–          avoid unnecessary litigation/costs

–          to facilitate efficient management of the proceedings if litigation is unavoidable.

The pre-trial review protocol sets out the standard of procedure that must be followed before an application for judicial review can be made. Except in extremely urgent cases, a potential applicant for judicial review should send a letter as soon as possible after the grounds for such review arise, and the respondent should respond within 14 days.

Regarding the decision to follow the protocol, claimants must determine whether to use it, depending on the circumstances. However, if they choose to use the protocol, the court generally expects the parties to comply with its discovery requirements in a timely manner.

According to paragraph 54.5 of the CPC, applications for judicial review must be filed immediately and, in any event, no later than three months from the date when the grounds for such an application arose (except certain situations where particular deadlines apply, such as in planning and public procurement). The assessment of the timeliness of a claim depends on all the circumstances. Still, in general, the deadlines are strictly enforced, and compliance with them usually results in a refusal to grant the permit. Attempts to take measures for pre-trial resolution, including alternative dispute resolution methods, are not usually considered sufficient grounds for extending the time limits.

Claimants must serve the defendants and third parties with the claim form within 7 days of the issuance of the response under CPR 54.7. Confirmation of service must be sent within 21 days. Failure to comply with the relevant time limits will result in sanctions against the claimant.

Under SCA 1981, s 31, the court may dismiss a claim if it is highly probable that the result for the claimant would have been substantially the same even if the challenged conduct had not occurred. However, there are cases where reasons of exceptional public interest may oblige the court to continue the proceedings.

Under CPR 54.11A, an oral hearing may be held to decide whether to grant judicial review if it is necessary to consider arguments on the issue.

If the court grants permission for judicial review , it may also make case management directions under CPR 54.10(1) for the further progress of the case. The defendants have 35 days from the date of service of the order granting leave to review and file a statement of defence and evidence supporting their position.

Evidence, disclosure and duty of candour in judicial review proceedings .

An application for judicial review must have some grounds on which the court will already make a decision. Practice Direction 54A on judicial review states that disclosure is not required unless the court decides otherwise. Disclosure may be used only in certain cases to clarify the full picture when the facts are inconsistent and incomplete.

The principle of candour is also important. It consists in providing reliable information and facilitating a fair decision to the maximum extent possible. This obligation is imposed on all parties, but special attention is paid to the defendant – the public authority.

Judicial Review

Costs in Judicial Review proceedings

Court costs are one of the key points to pay attention to. Thus, the general rule associated with the costs of judicial review is that they are incurred after the fact. However, due to the peculiarities of judicial review, the plaintiff has additional benefits in the form of limitation or cancellation of court costs.

The court practice has shown the importance of regulating the issue of costs related to this type of case, as the defendant is a state body created to satisfy the needs of people. Thus, it has become important to regulate the issue of limiting or cancelling the plaintiff’s expenses in case of losing the case.

The proposed way to overcome this problem in The CJCA 2015 is currently quite effective. The most important for us are ss 87-90, which regulate intervener’s costs and costs capping.

According to the amendments made by this subsequent law, instead of PCO (previously protective cost orders), there is JRCCO (judicial review cost capping orders). The essence of a JRCCO is the simultaneous issuance of an order to limit or cancel the amount to be paid by the plaintiff in the event of a loss and a stagnation order against the defendant in the event of a win.

JRCCO s can be filed only by the plaintiff, due to its less favourable position than the state body, based on the latter’s nature.

Written by Vlad Krupski

share this Article

Recent articles, navigating intellectual property in the gaming industry.

The global gaming industry has experienced significant growth in recent years, driven by advancements in technology, immersive storytelling, and innovative gameplay mechanics. Video game companies

Navigating the Global Landscape with Intellectual Property Lawyers

As businesses and innovators increasingly look to expand their horizons and explore international markets, the role of intellectual property lawyers in securing and managing their

judicial review case uk

President Trump’s case thrown out in the High Court

A London high court judge dismissed former President’s Donald Trump’s data protection claim for damages over claims in the “Steele dossier” that he engaged in

judicial review case uk

Jaw Jaw better than War War but just in case you do have to litigate read an overview of the process.

You should only litigate where there is no other option available to you and after you have considered mediation. Below is an overview of the

Need Legal Advice? Book a Free Consultation

Southampton office.

  • 4 Brunswick Place, Southampton, SO15 2AN
  • 9am - 5pm (Mon to Fri)

Isle of Wight Office

  • 105 St James Square Newport Isle of Wight PO30 1UR
  • 01983 217494

London Office

  • 2 Middle Temple Lane, London, EC4Y 9AA
  • By appointment only

Italy Office

  • Via Capo d'Africa n.29/a-b, Rome, Italy, 00184

Lawdit Stay Legal Approved Badge

Lawdit ® Solicitors is the trading name of Lawdit Solicitors Ltd. Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority of England and Wales.

Quick Links

  • Our Services
  • Reading Room
  • Meet the Team
  • Legal Notices

Lawdit ® Solicitors © 2024. All Rights Reserved.

Chamber.png

Fully Managed SEO by Zenithics Ltd

Working to make government more effective

  • Accessiblility
  • Media centre
  • Partner with us

Judicial review

What is judicial review?

The entrance to the UK Supreme Court.

What is judicial review? 

Judicial review is a kind of court case, in which someone (the “claimant”) challenges the lawfulness of a government decision.  

This can be the decision of a central government department, another government body such as a regulator, a local authority, or certain other bodies when they are performing a public function. 

If the claimant wins, then the government decision can be declared unlawful, or quashed. That will sometimes mean that the decision has to be made again. Alternatively, the court can order the government to do or not do something. 

The law which applies in cases of this kind is sometimes called “public law” or “administrative law”. In very important cases which concern fundamental rights or the relationships between democratic institutions, it is sometimes called “constitutional law”. 

On what grounds can a government decision be overturned by the courts? 

There are three main grounds of judicial review: illegality, procedural unfairness, and irrationality.  

A decision can be overturned on the ground of illegality if the decision-maker did not have the legal power to make that decision, for instance because Parliament gave them less discretion than they thought. 

A decision can be overturned on the ground of procedural unfairness if the process leading up to the decision was improper. This might, for instance, be because a decision-maker who is supposed to be impartial was biased. Or it might be because a decision-maker who is supposed to give someone the chance to make representations before deciding on their case failed to do so. 

A decision can be overturned on the ground of irrationality if it is so unreasonable that no reasonable person, acting reasonably, could have made it. This is a very high bar to get over, and it is rare for the courts to grant judicial review on this basis.  

In addition, a decision can be overturned if a public authority has acted in a way which is incompatible with human rights that are given effect by the Human Rights Act 1998. There is one exception to this, though: if the public authority is merely doing what parliament told it to do, then it is not acting unlawfully even if it does act incompatibly with one of those rights. 

A judge cannot quash or declare unlawful a government decision merely on the basis that the judge would have made a different decision, or that the decision was wrong.  

Can the courts overturn legislation in judicial review cases? 

The courts cannot overturn or quash primary legislation passed by parliament. This is because, in the UK constitution, parliament is sovereign. 

The courts can overturn secondary legislation, made by ministers, on the normal grounds of judicial review.  

How many judicial review cases are there, and how many are successful? 

In 2018, some 3,597 claims for judicial review were lodged 4 Ministry of Justice, Civil justice stats table,  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/806900/civil-Justice-stats-main-tables-Jan-Mar_2019.x…  (commenced) in the High Court. However, most cases do not get very far, because a claimant must convince the court that they have an “arguable” case in order to be granted permission to proceed to a full hearing.  

Only 184 cases, or about 5% of total cases commenced, reached a full oral hearing in 2018. The rest were mostly refused permission to proceed, withdrawn, or resolved out of court. 

Of the cases that did proceed to a full hearing, the government body under challenge won 50% and lost 40%. The other cases were mostly withdrawn or have not yet reached a conclusion. 

Related content

Boris johnson should not pick a fight with the courts to burnish his brexit credentials.

The government should not be flirting with the idea of an ugly fight with the courts to get around legislation to stop a no-deal Brexit.

MPs standing down at the next general election

How many MPs are standing down at the next election, and why?

Rishi Sunak’s unhappy five families

Politico’s Esther Webber joins the podcast team to take stock of a dramatic few days in parliament.

What is in the prime minister’s ‘emergency’ asylum legislation?

The implications for constitutional and international law of the prime minister’s latest Rwanda gamble.

  • What Makes Us Different
  • Management Board
  • Management Team
  • Responsible Business
  • Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
  • By Department
  • By Situation
  • By Specialist Group

Kingsley Napley

  • - Banking and Finance
  • - Capital Markets
  • - Commercial Contracts
  • - Mergers and Acquisitions: Buying Another Business
  • - Mergers and Acquisitions: Selling Your Business
  • - Setting up Your Business and Becoming a Director
  • - Startup Investments
  • - Technology Law
  • - Corporate & Insurance Panel Costs Auditing
  • - Costs in Arbitration Proceedings
  • - Litigation Management
  • - Criminal Defence and Police Investigations
  • - FCA Investigations
  • - INTERPOL Red Notices and Extradition
  • - Investigations
  • - Proceeds of Crime and Money Laundering
  • - White Collar and Financial Crime
  • - Civil Fraud and Investigations
  • - Commercial and Contract Disputes
  • - Farms and Estates Disputes
  • - Financial Services Disputes
  • - Injunctions
  • - International and Cross-Border Disputes
  • - Professional Negligence
  • - Reputation and Media
  • - Shareholder and Director Disputes
  • - Tax Disputes and Investigations
  • - Trust and Estate Disputes
  • - Disciplinary and grievance procedures, absence and performance management
  • - Discrimination claims
  • - Employers
  • - Employment contracts, policies and procedures
  • - Employment disputes and litigation
  • - Executives
  • - Flexible working and family friendly rights at work
  • - GDPR and data protection
  • - Global mobility and employment law
  • - Partnerships and LLPs
  • - Restrictive covenants and team moves
  • - Senior managers and certification regime
  • - Terminations and settlement agreements
  • - Transactions, redundancies, restructurings and outsourcing
  • - Workplace investigations and whistleblowing
  • - Alternatives to Litigation
  • - Considering Divorce or Separation
  • - Getting Married
  • - International Family Law
  • - Modern Families
  • - Thinking about the Children
  • - Applying for a sponsor licence
  • - Bringing Your Family to the UK
  • - British citizens travelling to the EU for business: What employers need to know
  • - Challenging Home Office Decisions
  • - Compliance and audit
  • - European Citizens and Their Families
  • - Expanding Your Business into the UK
  • - Global Talent
  • - High Potential Individual
  • - Human Rights and Asylum
  • - Kingsley Napley's Global Immigration Network
  • - Immigration advice for Entrepreneurs and UK Startups
  • - Obtaining British Citizenship and Staying Permanently
  • - Skilled Worker visas and sponsor licences: A guide for employers
  • - Sponsoring and Hiring Foreign Nationals
  • - Strategic Immigration Support for HR Teams
  • - Temporary work
  • - Tier 1 Investor Programme
  • - Visiting the UK
  • - Visiting the UK for business
  • - Brain Injury Claims
  • - Cerebral Palsy, Birth Injury and Paediatric Claims
  • - Child Injury (Paediatric) Claims
  • - Court of Protection and Deputyship
  • - Death and Fatal Accident Claims
  • - Hospital Negligence Claims
  • - Limb Amputation Claims
  • - Misdiagnosis Claims
  • - Personal Injury Claims
  • - Sepsis Claims
  • - Spinal Injury Claims
  • - Visual and Sensory Impairment Claims
  • - International Personal Tax and Succession Planning
  • - Landed Estates and Heritage Property
  • - Probate and Estate Administration
  • - Succession Planning and Inheritance Tax
  • - Wills and Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA)
  • - Business and Human Rights
  • - Freedom of Information/Environmental Information
  • - Judicial Review
  • - Public Inquiries
  • - Public Policy and Governance
  • - Select Committees
  • - Commercial Real Estate
  • - Construction and Engineering
  • - Real Estate Litigation
  • - Residential Real Estate
  • - Advice for Professionals
  • - Advice for Regulators and Public Bodies
  • - Advising Chambers, Barristers and Judges
  • - Advising Solicitors and Law Firms
  • - Defending Accountants and Accountancy Firms
  • - Legal Defence for Healthcare Professionals
  • - Licensing, Hospitality and Leisure
  • - Setting up a healthcare practice
  • - Students and Universities
  • - Restructuring Advisory Services
  • - Directors, Officers and Executives
  • - Distressed Investors & Lenders
  • - Insolvency Practitioners
  • - Accountants & IFAs
  • - Creditors
  • Art and Creative Media
  • Charities - Litigation, Crisis & Investigations
  • - Applications for Registration in Financial Services
  • - Private Wealth Disputes
  • Property & Construction
  • Regulated Professionals
  • Tax Law and HMRC
  • Coronavirus (COVID-19)
  • Built Environment
  • Buying or Selling your Business
  • Challenging Professional Conduct
  • Contractual Matters
  • Dealing with an Investigation
  • Dealing with Disputes and Claims
  • Defending an Allegation
  • Hybrid Working
  • Investing in the UK
  • Moving to the UK
  • Online Safety
  • Political Affairs
  • Protecting your Assets
  • Protecting your Reputation
  • Responding to a Data Leak
  • Sexual Misconduct in the Workplace

Specialist Group

  • American Services
  • Anglo-French Services
  • Banking and Finance
  • - Brexit - What EU citizens living in the UK need to know
  • Crypto, Digital Assets and NFTs
  • - GDPR Compliance
  • - Dealing with a Data Breach
  • - Responding to a Data Leak
  • Directors, Officers & Shareholders
  • Dubai & UAE Services
  • Employee Incentives
  • Entrepreneurs
  • Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG)
  • Fire Safety Law
  • International Families
  • International Protection
  • Legal Services for Accountants
  • Safeguarding
  • Services anglo-français de Kingsley Napley

Services A-Z       Pricing

  • Anglo-French
  • Corporate and Commercial Law
  • Criminal Law
  • Crypto assets
  • Data Protection
  • Defending Professionals Law
  • Directors & Officers
  • Dispute Resolution Law
  • Diversity Matters
  • Employment Law
  • Financial Services
  • Giving Something Back
  • Immigration Law
  • Legal Services Regulation
  • Litigation for Charities
  • Medical Negligence and Personal Injury
  • Private Client Law
  • Real Estate Law
  • Trainee Solicitor

13 December 2023

Economic crime and corporate transparency act (eccta): a practical guide for law firms, 12 december 2023, unprofessional behaviour in accountancy firms: regulatory implications and internal investigations, 28 november 2023, are defendants adequately supported through the criminal justice system, 23 november 2023, breakfast with kingsley napley and collas crill, 16 november 2023, safeguarding assets across borders, statutory registers podcast, james bell meets paul whiteing: part 1 - the duty of candour.

Show all talks

The UK Supreme Court has confirmed the principles for judicial review of policies

6 august 2021, r (a) v secretary of state for the home department [2021] uksc 37 and r (bf (eritrea) v secretary of state for the home department [2021] uksc 38  .

Two linked Supreme Court judgments provide a reminder to claimants that challenges to policies should focus on whether the policies authorise or approve violations of the law. The court acknowledges that policies are issued to promote practical objectives and the standards set for reviewing them must not be unduly demanding.

Why do policies exist and what is their constitutional place?

Supreme Court judgments are especially helpful when they clarify and confirm the key principles underlying legal tests. In these two linked cases, Lord Sales and Lord Burnett (who co-authored both judgments) have done just that. They explain that Ministers and public authorities often have to exercise wide discretionary legal powers. When that is so, they commonly issue policies to give guidance about how their powers will be applied in practice, although this is seldom a legal obligation. Such policies are not laws. They are statements about the practical application of the law and tools for the promotion of good administration. As such, they serve several purposes, notably: (i) encouraging consistency in how the relevant powers will be applied so as to avoid arbitrary or capricious differences of outcome; and (ii) increasing public understanding of the relevant authority’s actions, and therefore its accountability.

The judges proceed to further outline the purpose such policies are intended to play, as follows:

“They constitute guidance issued as a matter of discretion by a public authority to assist in the performance of public duties. They are issued to promote practical objectives thought appropriate by the public authority. They come in many forms and may be more or less detailed and directive depending on what a public authority is seeking to achieve by issuing one. There is often no obligation in public law for an authority to promulgate any policy and there is no obligation, when it does promulgate a policy, for it to take the form of a detailed and comprehensive statement of the law in a particular area, equivalent to a textbook or the judgment of a court.”

Lord Sales and Lord Burnett also explain that the constitutional principle of the separation of powers is especially important to any assessment of how far the courts will be prepared to grapple with and review the lawfulness of any given policy. They note that it is for Parliament to choose the rules it wishes to see applied, which it does by passing legislation. It is then for Ministers and public authorities (i.e. the executive) to apply the relevant rules, without distorting them in the process. The courts, as the third leg of the constitutional tripod, will be slow to intervene in Parliament’s area of legislative choice or in the executive’s area of establishing the administrative apparatus to apply the relevant rules in practice. The limited role of the courts is to ensure that the executive does not misdirect itself by giving policy guidance that authorises or approves violations of the law that Parliament has enacted.

What principle must the courts apply?

To further clarify the courts’ limited role, the Supreme Court stated that the principle in Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1986] AC 112 provides the basis on which the courts will intervene. They will do so only if the Minister or public authority “has, by issuing a policy, positively authorised or approved unlawful conduct by others” (i.e. it misdirects officials as to their legal obligations or directs them to do something that conflicts with their legal duties). The courts’ intervention is justified in those circumstances because there is a general duty on public authorities not to induce violations of the law by others and thereby undermine the rule of law. In their judgment, Lord Sales and Lord Burnett describe the test as “straightforward” to apply, saying that it simply “calls for a comparison of what the relevant law requires and what a policy statement says regarding what a person should do.”

The judges then identify broadly three types of cases where, applying the Gillick principle, a policy may be found to be unlawful by reason of what it says, or omits to say, by way of guidance about the law to which it relates. This will occur:

  • where the policy includes a positive statement of law which is wrong and which will induce a person who follows the policy to breach their legal duty in some way;
  • where the public authority which promulgates the policy does so pursuant to a duty to provide accurate advice about the law but fails to do so, either because of a misstatement of law or because of an omission to explain the legal position; or
  • where the public authority, even though not under a duty to issue a policy, decides to promulgate one and in doing so purports in the policy to provide a full account of the legal position but fails to achieve that, either because of a specific misstatement of the law or because of an omission which has the effect that, read as a whole, the policy presents a misleading picture of the true legal position.

Consistent with the judges’ account of the relevant underlying principles, these examples indicate a narrow supervisory role for the court in this area.

How closely will the court scrutinise the policy?

An important further element of the judgments is what they say about the intensity of the courts’ engagement with policy detail. The main message is that policies need to be treated pragmatically. They are useful statements about the practical application of the law, and need to provide reasonably clear working tools or signposts for caseworkers and officials. It is unrealistic for them to go into full detail about exactly how a discretion should be exercised in every case. It would be absurd for the courts to impose a much more onerous obligation on Ministers and public authorities to issue policies which remove the potential for the law to be misapplied by those who are subject to a legal duty. Lord Sales and Lord Burnett firmly reject any requirement for a policy to eliminate uncertainty in relation to the application of a legal rule, stating that:

“Whenever a legal duty is imposed, there is always the possibility that it might be misunderstood or breached by the person subject to it. That is inherent in the nature of law, and the remedy is to have access to the courts to compel that person to act in accordance with their duty.”

A good policy should recognise and reinforce the legal duties to which caseworkers and officials are subject under relevant legislation, and must not conflict with such duties. It need not, however, be comprehensive. Where officials breach their legal duties in specific cases, despite whatever lawful policies may exist to assist them, legal remedies may be available to those affected in any event.

Some see these two Supreme Court judgments as identifying a tougher common law test for the judicial review of policies, consistent with the Lord Chancellor’s recent suggestion that ‘judicial restraint’ in this area is on the rise. Another reading is that the judgments merely recognise the reality of how policies function (as opposed to legislation) in the workings of the UK administrative state. Importantly, both the policies in question in these cases were directed at public authorities rather than at regulating the conduct of private persons, where different expectations might perhaps apply. Commentators may or may not recognise the charge that ‘judicial activism’ has begun to undermine the legitimacy of judicial review in recent years. What ought to be common ground, however, is that the legitimacy of judicial review will not be enhanced by setting Ministers and public authorities up to fail by measuring them against unduly demanding criteria. Nor would discouraging the executive from issuing policies at all, by making this prohibitively costly and legally complex, contribute to good public administration. Public authorities must themselves continue to recognise the value of drafting policies carefully and continually improving them, so that their consequences are appropriate.

Further information

Kingsley Napley LLP regularly represents parties in judicial review challenges. Our lawyers also blog regularly about public law matters. Follow our Public Law blog for the latest commentary.

Should you have any questions about the issues covered in this blog, please contact Nick Wrightson  or a member of our  Public Law team .

About the Author

Nick Wrightson  is a Partner in our  Public Law team . Nick has an administrative and public law practice focused on judicial review litigation and supporting clients through public inquiries and complex inquests. Nick’s experience includes representing public bodies, private companies, individuals, representative bodies and charities – often in high stakes, politically and commercially sensitive cases.

judicial review case uk

Nick Wrightson

+44 (0)20 7369 3766, [email protected], connect on linkedin, download vcard, subscribe to blog rss feed, subscribe to all blog rss feeds, latest blogs & news, a plethora of public inquiries.

This article was first published by New Law Journal on 4th August.

The Judicial Review and Courts Bill: Proposed reform of Judicial Review

Attempts to narrow the scope of judicial review have long been on the Conservative Party’s political agenda. Following the Independent Review of Administrative Law (‘IRAL’) and the subsequent government consultation on reform of judicial review, the then Lord Chancellor, Robert Buckland, introduced the Judicial Review and Courts Bill (‘ the Bill ’) to the House of Commons on 21 July 2021. The Bill is making its way through Parliament and is currently at the committee stage.

As we highlighted in our earlier blog following the Bill’s announcement, the proposed reforms are, at first sight, milder than had been feared. Nevertheless, the Bill proposes to make significant amendments to the remedies available in judicial review proceedings and to also limit the court’s jurisdiction.

Case Note – challenging the Court’s jurisdiction in judicial review proceedings: R (Girgis) v Joint Committee on Intercollegiate Examinations [2021] EWHC 2256 (Admin)

The Administrative Court of England & Wales has recently considered a challenge to its jurisdiction to hear a judicial review claim on the basis (asserted by the defendant) that the claim should be heard at the Court of Session in Scotland. As explained below, the challenge was unsuccessful, but the case is interesting not just because of the Court’s conclusion on the substantive issue but also because of His Honour Judge Simon’s approach to the “technical” (procedural) issues the case gave rise to.

New guidance encourages judicial review practitioners to be concise, succinct and prepared

Earlier this year, changes to Practice Direction 54A (covering judicial review) and 54B (covering urgent applications) came into effect. This blog will consider the impact that the changes have had on the procedure for judicial review, before turning to a recent example of the perils of failing to follow the rules.

Can you devise an effective ouster clause to exclude a category of decision making from judicial review?

The Judicial Review and Courts Bill contains a new ‘ouster clause’ designed to prevent judicial review of the Upper Tribunal’s decisions on certain applications for permission to appeal against decisions of the First-Tier Tribunal. This blog explores why drafting legislation to restrict judicial review is so difficult.

R (A) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 37 and R (BF (Eritrea) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 38

Judicial Review Reform – waiting for the sting

Long awaited reforms to judicial review were revealed yesterday by Robert Buckland in his Judicial Review and Courts Bill. Thankfully the proposals to suspend quashing orders and limit their retrospective effect retain all-important judicial discretion and, at face value, are milder than feared. However, the decision to exclude the review of Upper Tribunal permission-to-appeal decisions (so called “Cart JRs”) is more troubling, marking the return of ouster clauses and possibly setting the groundwork for the removal of the jurisdiction of the Administrative Court in future legislation.

Supreme Court rules that Nigerian communities can have their case against Shell heard in the English courts

This morning (12 February 2021) the UK Supreme Court handed down judgment in Okpabi & others v Royal Dutch Shell (“ Okpabi ”) , a case concerning mass oil pollution in the Niger Delta. Judgment is in favour of the claimants, communities representing over 40,000 affected citizens of Nigeria, whose claim against oil conglomerate Shell and its Nigerian subsidiary can now be heard in the English courts.

Office for Students refusal to register higher education provider unlawful due to failure to delegate and ‘secret policy’

The Bloomsbury Institute was fighting to survive financially after the Office for Students refused its application for registration. It brought a judicial review challenge which revealed that an unpublished policy had been followed. The policy had been formulated by an official who did not have the power to make the relevant decisions.

International Court of Justice and UN General Assembly do not alter the outcome of the Chagos Islands challenge

In a February 2019 Advisory Opinion, the International Court of Justice stated that, under international law, the decolonisation of Mauritius by the UK has never been lawfully completed and the UK must therefore “end its administration” of the Chagos islands.

Voter ID laws and the way courts interpret legislation

Interpreting legislation is both an art and a science. This recent Court of Appeal case illustrates how judges do it in the context of the statutory scheme used to introduce controversial voter ID pilot schemes.

The High Court confirms that unincorporated associations may participate in both judicial review claims and statutory challenges

Even if it is generally more straightforward for the claimant to be a legal person, this judgment may give confidence to the likes of amateur sports clubs and campaigning pressure groups considering challenging the exercise of public power.

Enemies of the constitution? The words of those attacking independent judges are corrosive and wrong

Everyone has an opinion on yesterday’s decision of the UK Supreme Court. Boris Johnson said on television that he profoundly disagreed with it. Jacob Rees-Mogg reportedly called it a ‘constitutional coup’ on a cabinet conference call. Former Lord Chancellor Michael Gove was distinctly equivocal about it when interviewed on the Today programme. Laura Kuenssberg reported on Twitter that a No 10 source said ‘the Supreme Court is wrong and has made a serious mistake in extending its reach into these political matters’. The fact these people all claim they will still ‘respect’ the decision does not detract from the corrosiveness of their sentiments.

Since prorogation ‘never happened’ what happens next?

The prorogation judicial reviews concerned the constitutional equilibrium between government, parliament and the courts. Today, an 11 member UK Supreme Court panel affirmed its centuries-old supervisory jurisdiction over acts of government and ruled unanimously that Boris Johnson’s government failed to advance any reasonable justification for proroguing parliament. The prorogation was therefore unlawful and ‘never happened’ so parliament is back in the game.

When politics and law collide: The prorogation judicial reviews

Scotland’s highest court and a senior divisional court of the High Court in England and Wales have reached opposite conclusions about whether the recent decision to prorogue parliament was lawful.

“WhatsApp” with Dominic Grieve’s motion for Brexit communications?

Monday night’s marathon session in Parliament saw a number of issues debated into the small hours and further defeats for the government. While many raised important political and legal issues, one of particular interest to information lawyers, followers of Parliamentary procedure and journalists alike was the endorsement of a “Humble Address” motion brought by former Attorney General, Dominic Grieve.

High Court finds Mayor’s Congestion Charge decision did not involve unlawful discrimination

On 24 July 2019, the High Court handed down judgment in R (on the application of Independent Workers Union Of Great Britain and others) v Mayor Of London [2019] EWHC 1997 (Admin) . This case related to the decision in December 2018 by the Mayor of London to remove an exemption and require private hire vehicles (“ PHV ”) to pay the Congestion Charge from 8 April 2019

London Climate Action Week: Saving Londoners from nitrogen dioxide, one judicial review at a time

According to the most recent data, two million people in London are living with illegal levels of air pollution. Nitrogen dioxide is one of the main pollutants and road transport is estimated to be responsible for 50% of total emissions.

KN Green Week: Can law help save the world?

We have seen in recent months various and different attempts by those who want to change the course of government policy on the issue of climate change.

Court finds approach by DWP to Universal Credit ‘odd in the extreme’

The High Court judgment of R (Johnson, Woods, Barrett and Stewart) v SSWP [2019]EWHC 23 (Admin) involved  a judicial review challenge to the method of calculating universal credit. The claimants successfully demonstrated that the DWP’s method of calculation was an incorrect interpretation of the Universal Credit Regulations 2013 ( the Regulations ) as it failed to account for circumstances where workers’ pay dates do not converge with the fixed assessment periods under the universal credit scheme. 

Choose a specialist area:

Our 'exceptional' team has over 25 years' experience, acting in the most significant public law cases.

Judicial Review

We are known for our notable strengths in judicial review litigation and our incisive and pragmatic advice.

Email this page to a friend

We welcome views and opinions about the issues raised in this blog. Should you require specific advice in relation to personal circumstances, please use the form on the contact page .

Leave a comment

Let us take it from here., +44 (0)20 7814 1200.

[email protected]

Connect With KN Linked in .cls-1 { fill: #fff; fill-rule: evenodd; } Twitter .cls-1{fill:#FFFFFF;}

Subscribe to our mailing list.

  • Services A-Z
  • Press Releases
  • KN in the News
  • Why Work for Us
  • Legal Vacancies
  • Non-legal Vacancies
  • How to Find Us
  • Join Our Mailing List

Legal Notices  |  Privacy Notice  |  Fraud Warning  |  Modern Slavery Statement  |  Complaints  |  Website Terms  |  Cookie Policy  |  Accessibility  |  Site Map

© 2024 Kingsley Napley LLP. All rights reserved. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, registration number 500046.

Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility

Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2023

Below you’ll find detailed legal guidance on bringing a judicial review case in the Administrative Court.

The 2023 edition reflects legislative and practice changes relevant to the Administrative Court over the last year.

It includes guidance on:

  • litigants in person
  • civil restraint orders
  • starting a claim
  • applying for permission for judicial review
  • specific practice points
  • urgent cases
  • substantive hearings
  • case management

The guide also includes contact details for the court, information on forms and fees, and addresses for serving documents on government departments.

NB: The Welsh translated version of the HMCTS Administrative Court will be available shortly.

Related content

  • Download 14.317_HMCTS_Administrative_Court_Guide_2023_WEB1.pdf file HMCTS Administrative Court Guide 2023 2.30 mb

judicial review case uk

The rise and fall of judicial review in the United Kingdom (Part I)

Photographie de la justice

The Judicial Review and Courts Bill 2021 is a significant intervention by the Executive to reform judicial powers. As the Bill passes through Parliament, it is important to consider the historical context of the independence of the judiciary and contemporary debates about judicial discretion and independence. Dark forebodings about the future of judicial review have been assuaged by the government - at least, for the moment. There are, however, ominous signs that more reforms might yet come, and these might encroach on judicial independence or place limits on the availability of judicial review [1]. The starting point for this paper, is a short excursus, a prologue, that sets out the historical path of judicial independence. This is followed by a brief overview of contemporary judicial review and the doctrine of judicial self-restraint. Finally, the conclusions of the recent Independent Review into administrative law and an assessment of the Judicial Review and Courts Bill are considered.

The elaboration of modern judicial review in the United Kingdom

Contemporary events are best considered in their historical context. In England, judicial review has roots within the myriad pages of legal history and court manuscripts. Early medieval history [2]  is difficult terrain, often shrouded in mystique, symbolism, and in any instances inadequate accounts [3]. The early origins of judicial review are an example. There was no single moment or event when the creation of judicial review and the independence of the judiciary was settled beyond doubt. Rather, judicial review emerged through a pragmatic process. However, Royal power pervaded all aspects of governing, adjudicating and law making. The one partial exception was local justice and the authority of the local Barons . Conflicts between royal power and local autonomy were frequent, not least over taxes, wealth, and lands. At times Baronial local authority and wealth seemed to override centralised royal power. The coronation ceremony, the moment when Royal power was enthroned and sanctified, defined the apex of supreme authority, a spectacle, shrouded in mystery and heavily religious. Religious rites, such as the blessing of oils were markedly significant. The oath of allegiance and the religious anointing was symbolic of God’s authority, intrinsic to royal power. Legal and administrative formalities completed this combination of authority and power, were, then, and remain important to this day. Witnesses to the royal seal and the parchments of proof provided judicial testimony of the acquisition of royal power. The coronation signified and formally united, executive, judicial and administrative powers, a fusion of royal authority and Divine rights. Yet doubts existed as to the reach of royal power, even its continuance. Royal power, however, possessed a winning hand through subservience, allegiance, and patronage.

The fusion of powers endured for many centuries; the separation of the different functions of the state was incremental and not inevitable, it ultimately required a revolutionary moment when a King lost his head, but soon after a redesigned monarchy was restored under Parliamentary power. The remnants of fused powers remain. The judicial elements have been preserved by the ceremonial as well as the functions of the state. The Exchequer Court, the basis of audit, eventually became independent through the office of Comptroller and Auditor General, today an Officer of Parliament. Parliament itself retained its judicial status as the High Court of Parliament; witnesses are summoned to give evidence to select committees and are granted immunity from legal suit. Clerks and officials dress in the costumes and wigs of judicial office. Parliamentary proceedings are officially recorded, like a court record; the Bill of Rights 1690 preserves the immunity of such parliamentary proceedings from judicial adjudication in any court of law. Parliament has contempt of court powers. Strong symbols of Royal power are also retained through the state opening of Parliament, the Queen’s Speech setting out government legislative proposals, the royal assent to legislation, and the appointment of the Privy Council. Judicial appointments are held in the name of the Monarch.

Judicial power was recalibrated under Parliament’s ultimate sovereignty, judicially accepted and honoured. By the late 17th century basic principles of judicial review (adopted through remedies offered by the Divisional Court of the High Court) developed and, in contrast to many civil jurisdictions, ordinary courts, as opposed to special courts, were competent to adjudicate on the legality of acts done by the executive and its officials. Indeed superior courts could exercise a supervisory role over inferior courts and tribunals, within their jurisdiction. The law was neither codified nor precise. It was full of technicalities and distinctions that reflected the intricacies of English administration and the vicissitudes of the political life of the nation. Judicial power was integral to government and governing under the King brought advice from lawyers into the heart of government with little or no separation of powers. The professionalisation of the English common law judges, mainly qualified Barristers, sharply contrasted with the lay character of the magistracy and the developing jury system. Judicial office was monopolised by the membership of the Inns of Court, ensuring a practitioner base for judicial decision-making.

Judicial independence, itself was hard won. Bates’s case [5] and the Case of Ship-money [6] favoured the King, reflecting a largely uninterrupted and continuous judicial approval of Executive power, including the royal prerogative, and the exercise of the personal discretion of the Monarch. Royal governing with the judges was habit forming. Little might have changed, but for the influence of Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634) Chief Justice of the Common Pleas (1606) and later Chief Justice of the King’s Bench in 1613. Coke adopted the line of reasoning that government in all its elements should only exercise power according to law. This marked the triumph of the common law entailing a self-assertive judicial power, but this was not guaranteed or inevitable. Two cases in 1607 Ladd’s Case [7] and Fuller’s Case [8], the judges assert their authority and jurisdiction over other inferior courts or tribunals. In 1610 in Chauncy’s case [9] judicial power rejected any use of the King’s powers of intervention in particular cases. Perhaps the hallmarks of that triumph were, the Case of Prohibitions (1608)[10] that denied the King’s authority to hear cases in person and in the Case of Proclamations (1610)[11], which denied the King’s authority to create new or novel proclamations. Attempts by the King to limit the common law jurisdictions were resisted as were any influence attempted extrajudicially. Thereafter judicial power developed, often having to differentiate between protections afforded to the individual and scrutiny over the powers of public authorities [12]. Such discretionary powers have always proved challenging where matters of legality and expediency maybe contradictory, and setting the balance of public interest and rights is hard to adjudicate. The Act of Settlement, 1701, granted tenure to the judges. They were, no longer removable at the whim of Royal power, but only, by an address of both Houses of Parliament and because of good behaviour[13].  Five years later the Act of Settlement 1706 protected judicial salaries, remarked upon, by Blackstone[14] as a considerable achievement.

Contemporary Judicial Review

The contours of judicial power could be said to be drawn by the end of the eighteenth century. Judicial review remains largely self-made through the application of judicial discretion, manifest in several epoch-making cases[15] .The predominant approach, historically and now, is one of judicial self-restraint. This was and is an operating presumption that government acts within its powers and obeys its own laws. Dicey’s scepticism[16]  about the need for administrative law left a long legacy of delay, particularly evident in the 1950s. It served to inhibit any rapid growth or radicalism in judicial review, reinforced by enormous deference to state power, perhaps a by-product of two world wars and the aftermath of the expansion of state powers and the redrawing of the boundaries between private capital and state ownership[17] .

A new beginning was marked by the introduction of publicly funded legal aid in 1965, and the influence of the civil rights movement in the United States that heralded a new era for judicial activism. In part, judicial creativity, was a response to the introduction of new legislative frameworks: the Race Relations Acts 1965 and 1976, on race discrimination; and liberalisation of the laws on obscenity and pornography by the Obscene Publications Act 1964 and pornography. Abortion law was reformed in 1967 and the rights of gay men to consent to sex in private, came under the Sexual Offences Act 1967. There were many other transformative legislative interventions. Industrial relations and arbitration were influenced by reform of tribunals and inquiries and the development of an ombudsman system in 1967 are examples. The hall mark of “good administration” was established as a norm, rather than an expectation. The Equality Act 1967 was passed which set the benchmark for equal rights between men and women, though much more remained to be done. Much of the legislation was general in scope, leaving areas requiring judicial gap-filling as well as being subject to, complex interpretation and adjudication. Keeping pace with legislative changes judicial attitudes changed, albeit within the limits of self-restraint, encapsulated in the rather earlier traditions set out in the 1948 Wednesbury Case[18]. This case set a test of reasonableness for public bodies and contained two tests for judicial review. The first is the test of rationality meaning that public decision-makers must act in a reasonable and professional manner. The second is a test of “last resort” for judicial intervention- this encapsulates the doctrine of self-restraint. Interpreting Wednesbury became a legal science of its own. A plethora of cases followed; Ridge v Baldwin[19] in 1964 on rules of natural justice, Padfield[20]  in 1969 on setting a more intensive test of reasonableness and Anisminic, also in 1969, on holding a restrictive approach to ouster clauses in statutes that purported to exclude judicial review. This marked a high point in judicial self–confidence emulating many overseas jurisdictions where courts could address “unbridled government” or executive authority. The UK by joining the then Common Market in 1972, marked a decisive constitutional moment for the courts with access to the EU Court of Justice, the final arbiter of Community disputes. Undoubtedly, conflicts between EU law and UK law had to be resolved in favour of the former, even if the latter was an Act of the UK Parliament[21]. This also marked a sizable shift in UK judicial standing and influence[22] .

The GCHQ[23] decision in 1985 allowed review of prerogative powers, but refused trade unions the right to overturn the government’s powers to disallow trade union membership at Cheltenham, the UK’s premier centre for intelligence gathering. The decision simultaneously accepted that national security considerations would prevail over trade union membership.

Increasingly, the courts were asked to rule on sensitive issues of policy making, even when protected by “ouster” clauses. The Anisminic decision (1969) signalled judicial preparedness to avoid the courts being excluded. In 2014 the campaign group Privacy International challenged the legality of the UK security services using bulk hacking techniques to access the mobile phones and computers of individual people. The ouster clause was first challenged in the Court of Appeal and then in the Supreme Court, which held, that section 67(8) of RIPA did not oust the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court[24]. In essence upholding the reasoning of Ansiminic.

Given the strength of judicial self-restraint and pre-eminent influence over judicial discretion, the government makes some startling current claims that there is “judicial overreach”. Their main cause celebre is the two Supreme Court decisions in Miller 1 and II. This has fed into an emerging political narrative that judicial review had been overextended and even that judges were too willing to review the merits of decisions including on policy, and somehow the “reasoning of decision-makers had been replaced, in essence with that of the courts”. The Conservative Party, soon after Miller II[25] gained an 80-seat majority at the General Election held at the end of 2019. In the Conservative Party manifesto (2019), a promise “to update the Human Rights Act and Administrative Law to ensure that there is a proper balance between the rights of individuals, our vital national security and effective government”. The underlying tone and message was that “while the rights of individuals needed protection…. and ensuring that judicial review was not abused to conduct politics by another means or to create needless delays”. The government set up two independent reviews, one into judicial review which has been published and the other into human rights, which is eagerly awaited over the Autumn of 2021.

[1] See The Law Society Gazette ( 26th July 2021)

[2] J.E.A Jollife, The Constitutional History of Medieval England, Adam and Charles Black, London, 1949)

[3] J.W.F Allison, The English Historical Constitution Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2007)

[4] John P. Dawson, A History ofLay Judges ,  Harvard UniversityPress, Cambridge Mass. 1960 pps. 116-177.

[5]   Case of Impositions (1606) 2 ST Tr 371 ( Bates Case)

[6]   Case of Ship Money  (1637) 3ST Tr 825.

[7] Ladd’s Case see: D.Lindsay Keir, The Constitutional History of Modern Britain 1485-1937 second edition London; Adam and Charles Black 9/198 citing Gardiner, History of England volume ii p. 39.

[8] Fuller’s Case see: Keir, op cit.,

[9] Chauncey’s Case see: Keir op cit.,

[10] Case of Prohibitions  (1607) 12 Co Rep 74.

[11] Case of Proclamations (1611) Co Rep 74

[12] Public opinion was often fickle- Daniel J. Kornsteing, Kill all the lawyers? Shakespeare’s Legal Opinion Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994 traces the legal disputes that found their way into Shakespeare’s plays.

[13] Also see: Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 and the Supreme Court ofJudicature ( Consolidation) Act 1925. Sir Jonah Barrington, a High Court judgein 1930 in the Admiralty Court has been the only judge dismissed after beingfound guilty of embezzlement. Lower court judges are arguably not protected inthe same way as the senior courts, see Terrell v Secretary of State for theColonies [1953] 2 QB 482. Also see: the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 onjudicial discipline. See: HC Deb ( 25th May 1830) Vol. 24 cc.1075-1083.

[14] William Blackstone (1723-80) Commentaries on the Laws of England ,1765-1769. See D. Lemmings,” The independence of the judiciary” in P.Birks,(ed.,) The Life of the Law:Proceedings the Tenth British Legal History Conference Oxford 1991 (London;Hambledon, Press, 1993) pp 125.149.

[15] Errington v minister of Health [1935] 1 K.B. 249, Local Government Board v Arlidge [1915] AC 120. Nakuda Ali v Jayarthne [1951] AC66.,   Franklin and others v Minister of Town and Country Planning [1948]AC 87,   Cooper v Wandsworth Board of Works (1863) 14 CB (NS), 180.

[16] A.V Dicey, “ The development of administrative law in England”(1915) 31 LQR 148. A.V Dicey, (1835- 1922) English Jurist and Vinerian Professor of the law at Oxford (1882-1909).

[17] Lord Hewart, The NewDespotism (London: Ernst Benn, 1929).

[18] Associated Provincial PictureHouses v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223.

[19] Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC40

[20] Padfield V Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1968] UKHL 1, [1968] AC 997.

[21] Factortame litigation Case C- 213/89 [1990] ECR 2433.

[22] See the 1972 European Communities Act and the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Community, in Luxembourg . The UK was  also a signature to the European Conventionof Human Rights with individual petition to the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights.

[23] Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (GCHQ) [1985] AC 374.

[24] R (Privacy International ) vInvestigatory Powers and Tribunals and others [2019] UKSC 22.

[25] R (Miller)v The Prime Minister and others [2019] UKSC 41 ( herein after Miller 2)

John McEldowney, "The rise and fall of judicial review in the United Kingdom (Part I)", chemins-publics.org, 4 octobre 2021

Photographie couleur de l'auteur

Articles sur le même thème

Chaises vides d'un amphithéâtre

A propos de certaines évolutions actuelles du droit administratif, Entretien avec Paul Lignières

Photographie de Copenhague

Accès aux documents administratifs / Access to administrative documents VII. Openness and neutrality of the Danish public administration – an unhappy legal marriage?

Photographie de la Cour suprême

The Rwanda Decision of the UK Supreme Court: Reponses and Consequences

Photographie d'un drapeau européen

A propos de : La souveraineté européenne, sous la direction de François-Vivien Guiot, Mare & Martin, 2022

Photographie architecture de Malmo

Accès aux documents administratifs / Access to administrative documents VI. Le droit d’accès aux documents officiels, pilier de l’ordre juridico-social suédois

Photographie d'un drapeau américain sur un immeuble

Accès aux documents administratifs / Access to administrative documents V. Le Freedom of Information Act des États-Unis d’Amérique : un droit d’accès aux documents administratifs entre développement auto-centré et mondialisation

Illustration représentant un échange de données et d'informations

A propos de : Jacques Chevallier, « L’Etat en France. Entre reconstruction et réinvention »

Photographie d'une clef

Accès aux documents administratifs / Access to administrative documents IV. Le droit d’accès à l’information publique en Espagne

Photographie d'un cadenas

Accès aux documents administratifs / Access to administrative documents III. La FOIA italienne : caractéristiques, limites, problèmes ouverts

Photographie d'une table de bureau

Accès aux documents administratifs / Access to administrative documents III. Le droit d’accès à l’information en droit européen

Photographie d'un document sur une table

Accès aux documents administratifs / Access to administrative documents II. The UK Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

Photographie d'un document posé sur une table

Accès aux documents administratifs / Access to administrative documents I. Problématique

Photographie d'un bâtiment administratif

The Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022: The fascinating case of the Supreme Court Decision in Cart

Photographie d'un livre dans une bibliothèque

La question de l’effectivité du droit administratif A propos de : Guido Corso, Maria de Benedetto et Nicoletta Rangone, Diritto amministrativo effettivo, Il Mulino, 2022

Photographie en couleur d'une bibliothèque

L’antiparlementarisme doctrinal de la première moitié du XX° siècle et sa contribution à l’élaboration du droit public contemporain, à propos de l'ouvrage de José Esteve Pardo, El pensamiento antiparlementario y la formación del Derecho publico en Europa

Photographie en couleur de livres posés sur une table

Le droit, c’est quoi? A propos de La fabrique du droit. Une ethnographie du Conseil d’État (éd. La Découverte, Paris, 2002), de Bruno Latour

Photographie du marteau d'un juge

La démocratie au péril des prétoires

Feuillets de livres sur une table

A new Bill of Rights Bill 2022: A Brief Overview

Photographie de l'espace

Peut-on parler d’un « tournant spatial » dans le droit public ?

Perspective de colonnes

Entretien avec Céline Spector. A propos de: « No Demos? Souveraineté et démocratie à l’épreuve de l’Europe » (Seuil, 2021)

Photographie de la porte de Brandenburg à Berlin

Le devoir de protection comme dimension des droits fondamentaux allemands : une analyse à l’occasion de la jurisprudence récente

Terme democracy peint sur un mur

Démocratie et pouvoir exécutif. A propos de l'ouvrage Democracy and Executive Power de Susan Rose-Ackerman

Phototgraphie du Parlement européen

Le droit public, droit de la souveraineté. A propos du livre Les liquidateurs d’O. Marleix, Robert Laffont, 2021

Photographie de l'intérieur d'une salle d'audience

The rise and fall of judicial review in the United Kingdom (Part II)

Photographie couleur d'une bibliothèque

Le nouveau Code civil chinois, cadre original des activités administratives

Image d'une ruelle en Espagne

Un nouveau droit administratif espagnol ? À propos d’un ouvrage de Francisco Velasco

Photographie en contreplongée d'une carte

Le printemps du droit administratif comparé

Photographie en contreplongée de Londres

UK Government Review of Judicial Review

Vue plongeante d'une bibliothèque

Du discours performatif au discours déclaratif de l’État. A propos de la thèse de Hélène Orizet sur le service public de l’éducation nationale

Vue d'une bibliothèque contenant plusieurs ouvrages

Le dialogue du droit public et de l’analyse économique. A propos d'un livre de George Dellis

Bureau sur lequel sont disposées différentes cartes

Analyse comparée du gouvernement local et dépassement des modèles juridiques traditionnels. A propos d'un livre de Giorgia Pavani

Coucher de soleil au Brésil, avec le drapeau brésilien au premier plan

Un principe inédit de droit public posé par la loi brésilienne sur les normes de 2018 : le devoir de concrétude

judicial review case uk

  • International edition
  • Australia edition
  • Europe edition

Suella Braverman

Dramatic fall in successful high court challenges to government policy

Exclusive: Drop prompts warnings ministers’ attacks on lawyers could be having chilling effect on judges

Successful high court challenges to government policy and decisions by public bodies have fallen dramatically, prompting warnings that ministers’ attacks on lawyers could be having a chilling effect on judges.

The proportion of civil judicial reviews in England and Wales, excluding immigration cases, which claimants won out of total claims lodged fell by 50% on 2020, according to analysis seen by the Guardian. The figure is 26% if the success rate is measured out of cases that went to a final hearing.

The fall took place against a background of criticism by ministers. The attorney general, Suella Braverman , before taking office railed against “chronic and steady encroachment by … judges” and last year said in some cases they had “strained the principle of parliamentary sovereignty” . The lord chancellor, Dominic Raab , has warned judges against “harpooning” government infrastructure projects .

Boris Johnson doubled down on attacks on “lefty lawyers” after being forced to cancel the first planned Rwanda deportation flight last week after an injunction granted by the European court of human rights (ECHR) to one of the people due to be removed. The prime minister responded by accusing English lawyers of “abetting the work of criminal gangs” who facilitated Channel crossings. Raab suggested judges at the ECHR had overreached .

Responding to the judicial review figures, Raab’s predecessor as lord chancellor, Robert Buckland QC, said: “There’s certainly a downward trajectory on the year before – whether it’s a trend it is probably too early to say. But I would be very concerned if judges were feeling under pressure or in any way responding directly to comments made by ministers – that would not be desirable or appropriate.”

Buckland was sacked and replaced by Raab in September , with many believing he paid the price for not going further in the judicial review bill to restrict challenges to government. In December, the Times was briefed that Johnson was planning to let ministers throw out judicial review rulings they disagreed with , although the prime minister’s spokesperson said it was “not an accurate characterisation”.

A report published this month by the all-party parliamentary group on democracy and the constitution said ministers had acted improperly by questioning the legitimacy of judges when they did not get their own way and that the lord chancellor and attorney general had failed to defend the judiciary – often doing the opposite – as the pairs’ roles had become politicised.

The figures for the high court, obtained using the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) online analysis tool , show that there were 31 civil judicial reviews (excluding immigration) found for the claimant last year, the lowest since available records began in 2001, compared with 68 (the previous low) in 2020.

The success rate last year was also the lowest on record, whether as a proportion of total cases lodged (2.2%) or those that went to a final hearing (30%). By comparison, the average success rates between 2016 and 2020 were 4.7% of total cases lodged and 38.9% of those that went to a final hearing.

Jolyon Maugham QC, director of the Good Law Project, which identified the drop in the success rate and has been involved in high-profile judicial reviews against the government relating to Brexit and the VIP lane for suppliers of Covid personal protective equipment , said there was a risk the rule of law “could easily become a relic for the history books”.

He said: “The data suggests a collapse in judicial scrutiny of the government. We cannot know this is because of how ministers speak about judges and the law – but it is not easy to identify plausible alternative candidate explanations. Privately, senior judges are worried. And they should be.”

Other observers said there were already signs the supreme court had become more conservative. An analysis published by the UK Constitutional Law Association comparing last year with 2020 suggested the UK’s highest court now had more of “a tendency to reject human rights claims (only two out of 18 were successful last year) and to side with public authorities”.

In January, Patrick Hodge, the deputy president of the supreme court, spoke at an event run by the Judicial Power Project (JPP), one of the foremost critics of alleged judicial overreach, although he stated that “I don’t agree with some of the premises [of the JPP]”.

Jonathan Jones QC (Hon), the former head of the government legal department, said the reduction in the judicial review success rate “sounds significant” but it was difficult to draw conclusions why it had occurred. However, he highlighted comments by Braverman and Raab, adding: “We have also seen some more government-friendly language from the supreme court and one or two significant decisions, eg on standing,” (which limited who can challenge an alleged harm).

Conor Gearty QC (Hon), barrister and professor of human rights law at LSE, said while judges did their best, “the number of wins has always been very small, and now we see a drastic reduction in even that small percentage”.

He added: “It is hard to avoid the thought that the background noise of hostility to the judges and the courts, being generated relentlessly not only by ministers but even by the attorney general herself, has had an effect.

“The apparent desire of the supreme court to restrict the range of arguments before the courts and to cut back on challenging socio-economic claims may also have had some effect. These are worrying times for those who see accountability to the law as an essential feature of democracy.”

A MoJ spokesperson said: “Judicial review decisions are entirely a matter for independent judges, who now have greater powers to resolve cases in a more flexible and practical way thanks to our reforms.”

Three landmark judicial review cases

In 2016, the high court ruled that parliament had to give its consent before the government could trigger article 50 and formally initiate Brexit , prompting criticism by ministers and the infamous Daily Mail “Enemies of the people” headline . The decision was upheld by the supreme court which, in 2019, would rule that Boris Johnson’s prorogation of parliament during the Brexit crisis was unlawful , again angering the government.

In 2017, the supreme court ruled that employment tribunal fees of up to £1,200 were inconsistent with access to justice , forcing the Ministry of Justice to scrap the fees and entitling those who had already paid them to a refund. In the judicial review brought by the trade union Unison , the judges also found that fees were contrary to the Equality Act 2010 as they disproportionately affected women.

The government’s attempts to force the bedroom tax on partners of people with severe disabilities, which would have seen their housing benefit reduced by 14% for having a “spare” room, was ruled unlawful by the supreme court in 2019 . The judges said that applying the reduction to a man referred only as RR, was a breach of his right to a home under the Human Rights Act . They said RR’s partner was severely disabled so “it is accepted” that the couple needed an extra bedroom for her medical equipment. The effect was to restore full housing benefit to RR, and at least 155 other partners of disabled people.

  • Suella Braverman
  • Human Rights Act
  • Dominic Raab
  • Robert Buckland
  • Human rights

Most viewed

  • VisualV1 - Search Created with Sketch. Search

Explore our website

How can we help you?

I'm looking for advice.

Did you know Liberty offers free human rights legal advice?

I want to know what my rights are

Find out more about your rights and how the Human Rights Act protects them

Become a member

Join Liberty for as little as £2.50 a month

Liberty

  • Take action
  • Human Rights Act Articles
  • History of Human Rights
  • Human Rights Case Studies
  • Policy work

Human Rights Act / Judicial Review

How to stand up to power: Judicial Review & the Human Rights Act

How can I stand up to power? Find out more about using the Human Rights Act 1998 and judicial review to challenge unlawful decisions, actions and inaction of the state.

On this page:

Disclaimer : this article is for general information. It’s not intended to be used as legal advice. For information on how to get legal advice, please see our page here .

If you think a public authority has acted unlawfully or violated your rights, you may be able to challenge their decisions, actions, or inaction.

WHAT IS A 'PUBLIC AUTHORITY'?

You can only use the Human Rights Act and judicial review to challenge the decisions, actions or inaction of ‘public authorities’.

PUBLIC AUTHORITIES INCLUDE…

  • Courts and tribunals
  • Government ministers or departments
  • Local councils
  • Prisons managers and staff
  • Statutory bodies (that derive their authority from legislation) such as the Information Commissioner’s Office, the National Crime Agency and the Legal Aid Agency.

Note also that some private bodies that are performing a ‘public function’ will be regarded as a ‘public authority’, including:

  • Privately-run prisons or immigration removal centres
  • Privately-run care homes receiving money from the local authority.

PUBLIC AUTHORITIES DO NOT INCLUDE…

  • Parliament and anyone exercising functions in connection with its proceedings (such as MPs and peers)
  • A private company not exercising public functions (receiving no public funding and under no statutory obligation to perform its functions).

You can do this by using these two crucial tools:

– Judicial Review

– The Human Rights Act

Below we provide information on what these tools are and when you can use them.

JUDICIAL REVIEW

What is judicial review.

Judicial review is a type of legal challenge that you can bring against a public authority, asking a judge to examine the lawfulness of their decision, action or inaction. This will involve the judge looking at the way the decision was made, not the decision itself.

WHO CAN USE JUDICIAL REVIEW?

To bring a judicial review, you must demonstrate a ‘ sufficient interest ‘ in the decision, action or inaction. Normally this means you can challenge something that personally affects you or your community. An organisation may also be able to bring a judicial review in relation to a decision, action or inaction that has wider public importance.

WHEN CAN I USE JUDICIAL REVIEW?

  • Last Resort

You should only use judicial review after you have explored other ways of resolving the issue, including any available appeals and complaints procedures.  However, make sure you don’t miss the time limit (see below) while you explore these other ways.

It is necessary to bring a judicial review “ promptly and in any event not later than 3 months” of the decision, action or inaction you want to challenge. Some types of judicial review must be brought sooner (e.g. within six weeks for planning decisions). The court may still reject your application for judicial review even if brought within 3 months, if it could have been brought sooner.

You must apply for permission from the Court to bring a judicial review before it can be fully considered. A lawyer will be able to provide guidance on the strength of your case (see below ).

REASONS FOR USING JUDICIAL REVIEW

You can use judicial review to challenge the lawfulness of a decision, action or inaction for various reasons, including:

• Irrationality – a decision, action or inaction was so unreasonable that no reasonable person acting reasonably could have made it. Note that this can be a very difficult reason to demonstrate.

• Illegality – a decision, action or inaction was beyond the powers available to the public authority (this is called ‘ultra vires’), or contrary to the Human Rights Act .

• Procedural Unfairness – a decision, action or inaction was taken improperly (e.g. without a fair hearing or proper consultation, with bias, or against your legitimate expectations).

WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE OUTCOMES?

If your judicial review is successful, a judge may decide (at their discretion) to grant a range of remedies, including:

• Quashing Order – overturning an unlawful decision and requiring a public authority to take the decision again in a way that is lawful. Note that this may result in a public authority reaching the same decision.

• Declaration – clearly stating what the law is.

• Declaration of Incompatibility – see Human Rights Act below .

• Mandatory Order – requiring a public authority to do something.

• Prohibiting Order – preventing a public authority from taking an unlawful decision or action it has not yet taken.

• Injunction – preventing an unlawful act or requiring a public authority to do something, at an early stage.

• Damages – providing compensation, particularly where a public authority has violated your rights. Courts will only award these in certain, limited circumstances.

Further information and guidance on judicial review is available here .

HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

What is the human rights act.

The Human Rights Act makes it possible for you to enforce your rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in the UK, by:

  • requiring public authorities to act in a way that respects your rights;
  • allowing you to bring a claim in UK courts when your rights are violated by a public authority; and
  • requiring judges to interpret and apply other laws in a way that is compatible with your rights.

WHO CAN USE THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT?

Any person present in the territory of the United Kingdom, regardless of whether or not they are a British citizen or a foreign national, a child or an adult, a prisoner or a member of the public, can use the Human Rights Act to defend their rights. In exceptional cases, people outside the territory of the United Kingdom can use the Human Rights Act if they are considered to be within the UK’s ‘jurisdiction’ – i.e. where the UK has ‘effective control’ over the territory or otherwise exercises power and authority over you – for example on a British Armed Forces base abroad.

However, to be able to bring a claim, you must have been – or would be – a ‘ victim ‘ of an alleged violation(s) by a public authority. This means you must have been – or would be – directly affected by the alleged violation.

  • bring a free-standing civil HRA 1998 claim when your rights have been violated;
  • use the HRA 1998 as the basis for ‘illegality’ grounds in a judicial review; or
  • otherwise rely on the HRA 1998 in “any legal proceedings” (e.g. as part of your defence if prosecuted for a criminal offence).

WHEN CAN I USE THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT?

You should only bring a claim under the Human Rights Act once you have used any other available remedies, including registering a formal complaint with the public authority and, if necessary, complaining to the relevant supervisory body (e.g. Independent Office for Police Conduct – see Liberty’s guidance on making a police complaint here ). Note that you can still argue that your rights under the Human Rights Act have been breached as part of these initial complaints.

You must normally bring a claim under the Human Rights Act within one year of the alleged violation, unless the Court decides it is fair for the claim to be brought later than this.

WHAT RIGHTS DO I HAVE?

You can bring a claim under the Human Rights Act in relation to any action or inaction by a public authority that violates your rights.

Some of your rights under the Human Rights Act are ‘absolute’ and a public authority must not breach them under any circumstances (e.g. the right not to be tortured or subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 ).

Other rights are ‘qualified’ (e.g. the right to privacy under Article 8 and freedom of expression under Article 10 ) which means that a public authority may lawfully restrict these rights where it is necessary and proportionate way of achieving one or more particular aims that include national security, public health, and crime prevention.

Your rights may also create positive obligations for public authorities (e.g. the police have a duty to properly investigate reports of sexual violence).

Further information about your rights under the Human Rights Act is available here .

WHAT KIND OF REMEDY CAN I GET?

Courts must interpret the law – including the laws applied to you by any public authority – in a way that is compatible with your rights.

If a court decides that the law is not compatible with your human rights, then it will have different options open to it, depending on whether the law is found within an Act of Parliament (primary legislation) or made by Government Ministers under powers given to them by Parliament (secondary legislation).

Where a court decides that a piece of secondary legislation is compatible with your human rights, then it can strike this law down (unless an Act of Parliament prevents it from doing so).

Where a court decides that an Act of Parliament is incompatible with your human rights it can only declare that the law is not compatible with your rights. It cannot strike the law down. While this declaration of incompatibility will not affect your individual case, because the incompatible law will remain valid, it provides Parliament with an opportunity to change the law to make it compatible and ensure that similar violations are not repeated.

The Court may decide to award damages (compensation) for any violations of your rights.

For a more detailed explanation of how the Human Rights Act works in practice, see our explainer here .

HOW TO BRING A CLAIM

To bring a judicial review, you need to fill in a judicial review claim form (‘N461’). You then need to file the form (send by post or bring it in person) at the relevant court building.

Because judicial review is a complex type of legal claim and some sections of the form require detailed legal knowledge, we strongly advise that you find a lawyer with expertise in public law (see below ).

THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

To bring a Human Rights Act claim, you need to fill in the standard civil claim form (‘N1’). You then need to file the form at the relevant court building.

At the top of the second page of the form, where it asks “Does, or will, your claim include any issues under the Human Rights Act 1998?” , tick “Yes” .

As with a judicial review, we strongly advise you to find a lawyer with expertise in human rights law (see below ) to assist you with your claim.

LEGAL REPRESENTATION & FUNDING

As noted above, if you are considering bringing a judicial review or a claim under the Human Rights Act, we strongly advise you to get a lawyer to represent you.

Legal aid funding is available for judicial review and Human Rights Act claims. Your lawyer will be able to assess your eligibility and otherwise discuss alternative funding options.

Additional sources of free legal advice, as well as further information on how to find a lawyer and fund your case, are available here .

Further Support

If you require more specific advice and guidance on judicial review and the Human Rights Act in relation to a particular matter, you can contact our Advice and Information team here .

Help Liberty Stand Up To Power

These crucial tools are under threat from the Government. Help us to protect judicial review and the Human Rights Act by joining our campaign here .

What are my rights on this?

Did you find this content useful.

Help us make our content even better by letting us know whether you found this page useful or not

Sign up for email updates

Enter your email to receive updates about Liberty’s campaigns and how you can support our work

Your details are safe with us. We won’t ever pass your information on to other organisations for them to market to you.

Recent decisions lists contain the 20 most recently rendered court judgments for each BAILII court/tribunal database, in reverse chronological order.

  • Intellectual Property Enterprise Court
  • England and Wales Family Court Decisions (High Court Judges)
  • The Parole Board for England and Wales
  • England and Wales Court of Protection Decisions
  • England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
  • England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions
  • England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions
  • England and Wales High Court (Admiralty Division) Decisions
  • England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions
  • England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) Decisions
  • England and Wales High Court (Family Division) Decisions
  • England and Wales High Court (Patents Court) Decisions
  • Mercantile Court
  • England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions
  • England and Wales High Court (King's Bench Division) Decisions
  • England and Wales High Court (Technology and Construction Court) Decisions
  • England and Wales High Court (Senior Courts Costs Office) Decisions
  • English and Welsh Courts - Miscellaneous
  • England and Wales Patents County Court
  • Scottish Court of Session Decisions
  • Scottish High Court of Justiciary Decisons
  • Scottish Sheriff Court Decisions
  • Sheriff Appeal Court (Civil) Opinions
  • Sheriff Appeal Court (Criminal) Opinions
  • Scottish Information Commissioner Decisions
  • Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland Decisions
  • High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland Chancery Division Decisions
  • High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland Division Decisions
  • High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland Family Division Decisions
  • High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland King's Bench Division Decisions
  • High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland Queen's Bench Division Decisions
  • Northern Ireland High Court of Justice, Masters' decisions
  • Crown Court for Northern Ireland Decisions
  • Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
  • Fair Employment Tribunal Northern Ireland Decisions
  • Northern Ireland - Social Security and Child Support Commissioners' Decisions
  • Northern Irish Courts - Miscellaneous
  • United Kingdom Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber)
  • First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)
  • United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions
  • United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum (AIT/IAC) Unreported Judgments
  • United Kingdom Investigatory Powers Tribunal
  • United Kingdom Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber)
  • United Kingdom Supreme Court
  • The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Decisions
  • United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
  • United Kingdom Employment Tribunal
  • Special Immigrations Appeals Commission
  • United Kingdom Competition Appeals Tribunal
  • Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber)
  • Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
  • First-tier Tribunal (Health Education and Social Care Chamber)
  • First-tier Tribunal (Tax)
  • First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber)
  • Information Commissioner's Office
  • Supreme Court of Ireland Decisions
  • High Court of Ireland Decisions
  • Irish Court of Appeal
  • Irish Competition Authority Decisions
  • Irish Information Commissioner's Decisions
  • European Court of Human Rights
  • Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions)
  • Board Of Appeal Of The European Supervisory Authorities Decisions
  • Jersey Unreported Judgments
  • Jersey Law Reports
  • St Helena Court of Appeal Judgments
  • St Helena Supreme Court Judgments
  • The Dubai International Financial Centre
  • Abu Dhabi Global Market judgments (Court of Appeal)
  • Abu Dhabi Global Market judgments (Court of First Instance)
  • Qatar International Court judgments
  • Cayman Islands Reports Financial Services Division
  • Singapore International Commercial Court
  • Equisafety Ltd v Battle, Hayward and Bower Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 283 (IPEC) (15 February 2024)
  • Wise Payments Ltd v With Wise Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 234 (IPEC) (09 February 2024)
  • Cloud Cycle Ltd v Verifi LLC & Anor [2024] EWHC 233 (IPEC) (07 February 2024)
  • Thatchers Cider Company Ltd v Aldi Stores Ltd [2024] EWHC 88 (IPEC) (24 January 2024)
  • PSN Recruitments Ltd (t/a Cosmopolitan Recruitment) v Ludley & Anor [2023] EWHC 3153 (IPEC) (08 December 2023)
  • EnOcean GmbH v Far Eastern Manufacturing Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2615 (IPEC) (24 October 2023)
  • Prysmian Cables & Systems Ltd v M/S Apple International & Ors [2023] EWHC 2176 (IPEC) (07 September 2023)
  • Acedes Holdings, LLC & Anor v Clive Sutton Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2005 (IPEC) (07 August 2023)
  • Crafts Group LLC v M/S Indeutsch International & Anor (Supplemental Judgment) [2023] EWHC 1914 (IPEC) (26 July 2023)
  • Equisafety Ltd v Battle, Hayward And Bower Ltd [2023] EWHC 1821 (IPEC) (21 July 2023)
  • JBC Distributors Inc & Anor v Mudahy (t/a Pak Cosmetic Centre) & Anor [2023] EWHC 1480 (IPEC) (23 June 2023)
  • Crafts Group LLC v M/S Indeutsch International & Anor [2023] EWHC 1455 (IPEC) (16 June 2023)
  • KF Global Brands Ltd v Lead Wear Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1303 (IPEC) (02 June 2023)
  • Hayman-Joyce Property Ltd v Hayman-Joyce Broadway Llp Anor [2023] EWHC 1028 (IPEC) (02 May 2023)
  • Photobooth Props Ltd & Anor v Nepbh Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 755 (IPEC) (25 April 2023)
  • Yours Naturally Naturally Yours Ltd v Kate McVier Skin Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 890 (IPEC) (20 April 2023)
  • Evans v John Lewis Plc & Anor [2023] EWHC 766 (IPEC) (03 April 2023)
  • Industrial Cleaning Equipment (Southampton) Ltd v Intelligent Cleaning Equipment Holdings Co Ltd [2023] EWHC 411 (IPEC) (27 February 2023)
  • Marks And Spencer Plc v Aldi Stores Ltd [2023] EWHC 178 (IPEC) (31 January 2023)
  • Costa v Dissociadid Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 49 (IPEC) (16 January 2023)
  • Z, Re (Prohibition On Cross-Examination: No QLR) [2024] EWFC 22 (09 February 2024)
  • A Father v Middlesbrough Council & Ors [2024] EWFC 15 (02 February 2024)
  • BR v BR [2024] EWFC 11 (30 January 2024)
  • Z, Re (Surrogacy: Step-parent Adoption) [2024] EWFC 20 (30 January 2024)
  • L v O (Stay of Order; Hadkinson Order; Security for Costs) [2024] EWFC 6 (26 January 2024)
  • Y v Z [2024] EWFC 4 (16 January 2024)
  • P v M & Ors [2023] EWFC 254 (20 December 2023)
  • Galbraith-Marten v De Renee (Rev1) [2023] EWFC 253 (20 December 2023)
  • T v T [2023] EWFC 243 (12 December 2023)
  • HTD and HTE (Children), Re (Temporary Removal from Jurisdiction - Malaysia and Hong Kong) [2023] EWFC 227 (08 December 2023)
  • H v GH [2023] EWFC 235 (07 December 2023)
  • BL v OR [2023] EWFC 229 (07 December 2023)
  • HO v TL [2023] EWFC 215 (01 December 2023)
  • HO v TL (Costs) [2023] EWFC 216 (01 December 2023)
  • X & Anor (Declaration of Parentage) [2023] EWFC 217 (30 November 2023)
  • B and G (Children), Re [2023] EWFC 225 (30 November 2023)
  • G (A Child: Care Order) (Complex Developmental Needs) (No.2) [2023] EWFC 218 (29 November 2023)
  • A (a child), Re (Rev1) [2023] EWFC 198 (29 November 2023)
  • H (Surrogacy: Step-parent adoption), Re [2023] EWFC 214 (28 November 2023)
  • DH v RH (No 2) (Variation of Interim Arrangements) [2023] EWFC 210 (28 November 2023)
  • Pitchfork, Application for Reconsideration By, [2024] PBRA 21 (12 February 2024)
  • Taylor, Application for Set Aside [2024] PBSA 5 (17 January 2024)
  • Larsen, Application to Set Aside [2024] PBSA 2 (04 January 2024)
  • Charles, Application to Set Aside [2023] PBSA 88 (22 December 2023)
  • Robinson, Application for Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 212 (20 December 2023)
  • Townsend, Application to Set Aside [2023] PBSA 85 (14 December 2023)
  • Smith, Application for Reconsideration By, [2023] PBRA 207 (12 December 2023)
  • Sellen, Application to Set Aside, [2023] PBSA 80 (01 December 2023)
  • Williams, Application for Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 206 (01 December 2023)
  • Wood, Application to Set Aside, [2023] PBSA 82 (30 November 2023)
  • Lewis, Application for Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 200 (17 November 2023)
  • Ecer, Application for Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 198 (15 November 2023)
  • Maxwell, Application For Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 197 (14 November 2023)
  • Edwards, Application for Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 192 (13 November 2023)
  • Bennett, Application to Set Aside, [2023] PBSA 74 (09 November 2023)
  • Hafeez, Application to Set Aside, [2023] PBSA 75 (09 November 2023)
  • Hatch, Application For Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 194 (09 November 2023)
  • Khubaib, Application for Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 193 (07 November 2023)
  • McNeil, Application for Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 190 (06 November 2023)
  • Anderson, Application For Reconsideration, by [2023] PBRA 187 (03 November 2023)
  • EE, Re (Capacity: Contraception and Conception) [2024] EWCOP 5 (08 February 2024)
  • X NHS Foundation Trust v RH [2024] EWCOP 150 (05 February 2024)
  • DY, Re (Capacity) [2024] EWCOP 4 (30 January 2024)
  • GUP v EUP & Anor [2024] EWCOP 3 (25 January 2024)
  • King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust & Anor v TTN (Medical Treatment: Retinal Detachment) [2024] EWCOP 1 (17 January 2024)
  • A Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Ms KL & Anor [2023] EWCOP 59 (22 December 2023)
  • Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council v KB & Ors [2023] EWCOP 58 (21 December 2023)
  • The NHS Foundation Trust v K & Ors [2023] EWCOP 57 (14 December 2023)
  • TA v the Public Guardian [2023] EWCOP 63 (07 December 2023)
  • BNK (Dental treatment) [2023] EWCOP 56 (07 December 2023)
  • The Health Service Executive of Ireland v A Hospital Provider [2023] EWCOP 55 (24 November 2023)
  • University Hospitals Southampton NHS Foundation Trust v Miss T & Ors [2023] EWCOP 54 (17 November 2023)
  • Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust v Mr Y & Ors [2023] EWCOP 51 (15 November 2023)
  • GH, Re (Mastectomy: Best Interests: Costs) [2023] EWCOP 50 (06 November 2023)
  • East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust v DL & Anor (Rev1) [2023] EWCOP 47 (27 October 2023)
  • H, Re (An Adult; Termination) [2023] EWCOP 183 (24 October 2023)
  • PN, Re (Capacity: Sexual Relations and Disclosure) [2023] EWCOP 44 (20 October 2023)
  • Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust & Ors v Tooke & Ors [2023] EWCOP 45 (20 October 2023)
  • University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust v Thirumalesh & Ors [2023] EWCOP 43 (29 September 2023)
  • GK & Anor v EE & Anor [2023] EWCOP 49 (18 September 2023)
  • O (Description of Sexual Abuse) [2024] EWCA Civ 126 (15 February 2024)
  • Newron Pharmaceuticals SPA v The Comptroller General of Patents, Trademarks And Designs [2024] EWCA Civ 128 (15 February 2024)
  • AB (A Child : Habeas Corpus) [2024] EWCA Civ 105 (14 February 2024)
  • Rahman v Munim & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 123 (14 February 2024)
  • Roberts v Jones [2024] EWCA Civ 118 (14 February 2024)
  • AstraZeneca UK Ltd v Tesaro Inc [2024] EWCA Civ 78 (09 February 2024)
  • Disclosure and Barring Service v RI [2024] EWCA Civ 95 (09 February 2024)
  • Railways Pension Trustee Company Ltd v Atos IT Services UK Ltd & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 98 (09 February 2024)
  • Crafts Group LLC v M/S Indeutsch International & Anor [2024] EWCA Civ 87 (08 February 2024)
  • Brown v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue & Customs [2024] EWCA Civ 92 (08 February 2024)
  • Xanthopoulos v Rakshina [2024] EWCA Civ 84 (08 February 2024)
  • Xanthopoulos v Rakshina (Re Costs) [2024] EWCA Civ 100 (08 February 2024)
  • YM (Care Proceedings) (Clarification of Reasons) [2024] EWCA Civ 71 (08 February 2024)
  • Koro, R (On the Application Of) v County Court at Central London [2024] EWCA Civ 94 (08 February 2024)
  • Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Emmott & Ors (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 86 (07 February 2024)
  • Zhou & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWCA Civ 81 (07 February 2024)
  • Yalcin v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWCA Civ 74 (06 February 2024)
  • Dawson, R (On the Application Of) v Crown Court Sitting at Preston [2024] EWCA Civ 75 (06 February 2024)
  • Rahimi v City of Westminster Council [2024] EWCA Civ 73 (05 February 2024)
  • GFH Capital Ltd v Haigh & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 65 (05 February 2024)
  • Ali, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 77 (09 February 2024)
  • Bassaragh, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 20 (25 January 2024)
  • Norris, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 68 (25 January 2024)
  • Gross, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 21 (23 January 2024)
  • Casserly, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 25 (23 January 2024)
  • Di Marco & Anor, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 19 (16 January 2024)
  • AUV, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 11 (16 January 2024)
  • Prior, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1651 (21 December 2023)
  • Gjoni, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1634 (21 December 2023)
  • Kwake-Ampomah, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1638 (21 December 2023)
  • Barker, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1633 (21 December 2023)
  • Jacobs, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1503 (21 December 2023)
  • McCafferty, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1650 (20 December 2023)
  • Da Silva, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1624 (20 December 2023)
  • Bhoyroo, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1625 (20 December 2023)
  • Mari, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1631 (19 December 2023)
  • ART & Anor, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1680 (19 December 2023)
  • Nugent, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1649 (19 December 2023)
  • Ahmed, R. [2023] EWCA Crim 1521 (19 December 2023)
  • Sheibani v R. [2023] EWCA Crim 1505 (18 December 2023)
  • Lullington Solar Park Ltd v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities & Anor (Re Statutory Review under s.288 Town and Country Planning Act 1990) [2024] EWHC 295 (Admin) (16 February 2024)
  • MN, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2024] EWHC 333 (Admin) (16 February 2024)
  • MA, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs & Anor [2024] EWHC 332 (Admin) (16 February 2024)
  • Oakley, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2024] EWHC 292 (Admin) (14 February 2024)
  • Muhumud v Government of Norway [2024] EWHC 300 (Admin) (14 February 2024)
  • Mead Realisations Ltd v The Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing And Communities & Anor [2024] EWHC 279 (Admin) (12 February 2024)
  • Quaye, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2024] EWHC 211 (Admin) (09 February 2024)
  • TW, R (On the Application OF) v Essex County Council [2024] EWHC 264 (Admin) (09 February 2024)
  • AB & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Westminster City Council [2024] EWHC 266 (Admin) (09 February 2024)
  • Price & Anor v South Cambridgshire District Council [2024] EWHC 238 (Admin) (09 February 2024)
  • Arkorful v Social Work England [2024] EWHC 73 (Admin) (08 February 2024)
  • Rumpler v Regional Court in Budapest, Hungary [2024] EWHC 258 (Admin) (08 February 2024)
  • Director of Border Revenue v OM Cash and Carry Ltd [2024] EWHC 265 (Admin) (08 February 2024)
  • Montano, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Lambeth [2024] EWHC 249 (Admin) (08 February 2024)
  • Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care v General Dental Council & Anor [2024] EWHC 243 (Admin) (07 February 2024)
  • Juul v Chief Constable of Dyfed-Powys Police & Anor [2024] EWHC 193 (Admin) (07 February 2024)
  • Ibrahim v General Medical Council [2024] EWHC 131 (Admin) (07 February 2024)
  • Pratt & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Exeter City Council [2024] EWHC 185 (Admin) (02 February 2024)
  • Fiserova v District Court in Prachatice (Czech Republic) [2024] EWHC 204 (Admin) (02 February 2024)
  • Care North East, R (On the Application Of) v Northumberland County Council [2024] EWHC 184 (Admin) (31 January 2024)
  • SMIT Salvage BV & Ors v Luster Maritime SA & Anor [2023] EWHC 697 (Admlty) (30 March 2023)
  • FMG Hong Kong Shipping Ltd, the Demise Charterers of FMG SYDNEY v Owners of the MSC APOLLO [2023] EWHC 328 (Admlty) (17 February 2023)
  • Arnold v Halcyon Yachts Ltd [2022] EWHC 2858 (Admlty) (18 November 2022)
  • MV Pacific Pearl Co Ltd v Quick Ship Holdings SA [2022] EWHC 2828 (Admlty) (11 November 2022)
  • MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company SA v Stolt Tank Containers BV & Ors [2022] EWHC 2746 (Admlty) (02 November 2022)
  • Hoadley v Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 3169 (Admlty) (11 October 2022)
  • Wilforce LLC & Anor v Ratu Shipping Co. SA & Anor [2022] EWHC 1190 (Admlty) (20 May 2022)
  • MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company SA v Stolt Tank Containers BV & Ors [2022] EWHC 835 (Admlty) (12 April 2022)
  • Nautical Challenge Ltd v Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd (Consequential Matters) (Rev2) [2022] EWHC 830 (Admlty) (05 April 2022)
  • Nautical Challenge Ltd v Evergreen Marine (UK) Ltd [2022] EWHC 206 (Admlty) (08 February 2022)
  • River Countess BV & Ors v MSC Cruise Management (UK) Ltd [2021] EWHC 2652 (Admlty) (04 October 2021)
  • Tecoil Shipping Ltd v Neptune EHF & Ors [2021] EWHC 1582 (Admlty) (15 June 2021)
  • Taxidiotiki-Touristiki-Nautiliaki Limited (t/a Aspida Travel) v Columbus, Owners and or Demise Charterers of [2021] EWHC 310 (Admlty) (18 February 2021)
  • Monjasa Ltd & Anor v Vessel "Astoria" & Anor [2021] EWHC 134 (Admlty) (29 January 2021)
  • P&O Princess Cruises International Ltd v The Demise Charterers of the Vessel 'Columbus' [2021] EWHC 113 (Admlty) (26 January 2021)
  • Trans-Tec International, SRL & Anor v The Owners and/or Demise Charterers of the Vessel 'Columbus' [2020] EWHC 3443 (Admlty) (17 December 2020)
  • Argentum Exploration Ltd v The Silver [2020] EWHC 3434 (Admlty) (16 December 2020)
  • Sakizaya Kalon, Owners of The Vessel v Panamax Alexander, Owners of The Vessel [2020] EWHC 2604 (Admlty) (05 October 2020)
  • Premier Marinas Ltd v Owner(s) Of "Double Venus" and "Karma" [2020] EWHC 2462 (Admlty) (18 September 2020)
  • Holyhead Marina Ltd v Farrer & Ors (Emma) [2020] EWHC 1750 (Admlty) (07 July 2020)
  • Grosskopf v Grosskopf & Ors [2024] EWHC 291 (Ch) (16 February 2024)
  • Wootton & Anor v Wootton & Ors (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 325 (Ch) (16 February 2024)
  • Baldudak v Matteo (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 301 (Ch) (15 February 2024)
  • Optis Cellular Technology LLC & Ors v Apple Retail UK Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 197 (Ch) (14 February 2024)
  • Extreme E Ltd v Extreme Networks Ltd [2024] EWHC 319 (Ch) (12 February 2024)
  • Link Fund Solutions Ltd, Re (Re Companies Act 2006) [2024] EWHC 250 (Ch) (09 February 2024)
  • Benjamin v Benjamin & Anor [2024] EWHC 215 (Ch) (09 February 2024)
  • Aston Risk Management Ltd v Jones & Ors (Quantum) [2024] EWHC 252 (Ch) (09 February 2024)
  • Jacobs v Chalcot Crescent (Management) Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 259 (Ch) (09 February 2024)
  • Duke of Sussex & Ors v MGN Ltd (Re Costs) [2024] EWHC 274 (Ch) (09 February 2024)
  • Biria v Biria & Ors [2024] EWHC 121 (Ch) (09 February 2024)
  • Brown v Competition and Markets Authority (Re NRLB Ltd - Brown and Mason Group Ltd - Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986) [2024] EWHC 206 (Ch) (08 February 2024)
  • Thom Browne Inc & Anor v Adidas AG & Ors [2024] EWHC 257 (Ch) (08 February 2024)
  • South Tees Development Corporation & Anor v PD Teesport Ltd (Rev1) [2024] EWHC 214 (Ch) (05 February 2024)
  • Patel v Minerva Services Delaware, Inc. & Ors [2024] EWHC 172 (Ch) (05 February 2024)
  • BAT Industries Plc & Ors v Inland Revenue & Anor [2024] EWHC 195 (Ch) (05 February 2024)
  • Cadogan v Cadogan & Ors [2024] EWHC 165 (Ch) (02 February 2024)
  • Cotham School v Bristol City Council & Ors [2024] EWHC 154 (Ch) (02 February 2024)
  • Baylis & Anor v Haider & Ors [2024] EWHC 187 (Ch) (01 February 2024)
  • Tele Columbus AG, Re (Re Companies Act 2006) [2024] EWHC 181 (Ch) (01 February 2024)
  • Hamsard One Thousand And Forty-Three Ltd v AE Insurance Brokers Ltd [2024] EWHC 262 (Comm) (12 February 2024)
  • UnipolSai Assicurazioni SPA v Covea Insurance PLC [2024] EWHC 253 (Comm) (09 February 2024)
  • The Motoring Organisation Ltd v Spectrum Insurance Services Ltd [2024] EWHC 261 (Comm) (09 February 2024)
  • Southeaster Maritime Ltd v Trafigura Maritime Logistics Pte Ltd MV "Aquafreedom" [2024] EWHC 255 (Comm) (08 February 2024)
  • Granville Technology Group Ltd v Chunghwa Picture Tubes Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 13 (Comm) (08 February 2024)
  • Madison Pacific Trust Ltd v Groza & Anor [2024] EWHC 267 (Comm) (08 February 2024)
  • Mahtani & Ors v Atlas Mara Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 218 (Comm) (07 February 2024)
  • Al Saud v Gibbs [2024] EWHC 237 (Comm) (07 February 2024)
  • Tyson International Company Ltd v GIC RE, India, Corporate Member Ltd [2024] EWHC 236 (Comm) (07 February 2024)
  • Sodzawiczny v Smith (Re Arbitration Claim) [2024] EWHC 231 (Comm) (07 February 2024)
  • Skatteforvaltningen v MCML Ltd [2024] EWHC 148 (Comm) (02 February 2024)
  • ABFA Commodities Trading Ltd v Petraco Oil Company SA [2024] EWHC 147 (Comm) (30 January 2024)
  • Ripple Markets APAC PTE Ltd v P Dot Money Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 156 (Comm) (30 January 2024)
  • AerCap Ireland Ltd v AIG Europe SA & Ors [2024] EWHC 144 (Comm) (29 January 2024)
  • Lowry Trading Ltd v Musicalize Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 142 (Comm) (29 January 2024)
  • Eurobank SA v Momentum Maritime SA & Ors [2024] EWHC 210 (Comm) (29 January 2024)
  • Gatwick Investment Ltd & Ors v Liberty Mutual Insurance Europe SE (Rev1) [2024] EWHC 124 (Comm) (26 January 2024)
  • GLAS SAS (London Branch) v European Topsoho SarL & Ors [2024] EWHC 83 (Comm) (26 January 2024)
  • Macquarie Bank Ltd v Banque Cantonale Vaudoise [2024] EWHC 114 (Comm) (26 January 2024)
  • WWRT Ltd v Zhevago [2024] EWHC 122 (Comm) (26 January 2024)
  • D (Parentage: Local Authority Application) [2024] EWHC 305 (Fam) (15 February 2024)
  • A Hospital Trust v P & Ors [2024] EWHC 313 (Fam) (15 February 2024)
  • WB v VM [2024] EWHC 302 (Fam) (14 February 2024)
  • Kennedy v Thomas [2024] EWHC 303 (Fam) (14 February 2024)
  • VT v NHS Cambridgeshire And Peterborough Integrated Care Board & Anor [2024] EWHC 294 (Fam) (14 February 2024)
  • E, Re (Special Guardianship Order: Ukraine) [2024] EWHC 263 (Fam) (12 February 2024)
  • KS v VS [2024] EWHC 278 (Fam) (12 February 2024)
  • T v G [2024] EWHC 246 (Fam) (09 February 2024)
  • Collardeau v Fuchs & Anor [2024] EWHC 256 (Fam) (08 February 2024)
  • J v E (Habitual Residence) [2024] EWHC 196 (Fam) (08 February 2024)
  • Mother v Father & Anor [2024] EWHC 272 (Fam) (05 February 2024)
  • U, Re (A Child: Deprivation of Liberty) [2024] EWHC 228 (Fam) (02 February 2024)
  • Griffiths v Kniveton & Anor [2024] EWHC 199 (Fam) (02 February 2024)
  • T (A Child), Re (No.2) (Transparency: Publication of the Party's Names) [2024] EWHC 161 (Fam) (02 February 2024)
  • TKJ, Re (Abduction: Hague Convention (Italy)) [2024] EWHC 198 (Fam) (02 February 2024)
  • W, Re (Abduction: Asylum) [2024] EWHC 189 (Fam) (01 February 2024)
  • TRC v NS [2024] EWHC 80 (Fam) (22 January 2024)
  • West Northamptonshire Council v KA & Ors [2024] EWHC 79 (Fam) (19 January 2024)
  • T, Re (A Child)(S9(6) Children Act 1989 Orders: Exceptional Circumstances: Parental Alienation) [2024] EWHC 59 (Fam) (17 January 2024)
  • XZR, Re (Abduction: Hague Convention (Lithuania)) [2024] EWHC 64 (Fam) (17 January 2024)
  • Abbott Diabetes Care Inc & Ors v Dexcom Incorporated & Ors [2024] EWHC 36 (Pat) (15 January 2024)
  • Safestand Ltd v Weston Homes PLC & Ors [2023] EWHC 3250 (Pat) (19 December 2023)
  • Sandoz AG & Ors v Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH [2023] EWHC 3276 (Pat) (08 December 2023)
  • Saint-Gobain Adfors SAS v 3M Innovative Properties Company (Re Costs) [2023] EWHC 2949 (Pat) (23 November 2023)
  • Saint-Gobain Adfors SAS v 3M Innovative Properties Company [2023] EWHC 2769 (Pat) (08 November 2023)
  • Philip Morris Products SA & Anor v Nicoventures Trading Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2616 (Pat) (25 October 2023)
  • Abbott Diabetes Care Incorporated & Ors v Dexcom Incorporated & Ors [2023] EWHC 2591 (Ch) (18 October 2023)
  • Astellas Pharma Industries Ltd v Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 2571 (Pat) (17 October 2023)
  • Lufthansa Technik AG v Astronics Advanced Electronic Systems & Anor [2023] EWHC 2547 (Pat) (10 October 2023)
  • Chiaro Technology Ltd v Mayborn (UK) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2417 (Pat) (05 October 2023)
  • Sycurio Ltd v PCI-Pal PLC & Anor [2023] EWHC 2361 (Pat) (25 September 2023)
  • Cook UK Ltd v Boston Scientific Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2163 (Pat) (30 August 2023)
  • Heraeus Noblelight Ltd v First Light Lamps Ltd [2023] EWHC 1950 (Pat) (31 July 2023)
  • Nokia Technologies OY & Anor v OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co, Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1912 (Pat) (26 July 2023)
  • Price & Ors v Flitcraft Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1746 (Pat) (13 July 2023)
  • InterDigital Technology Corporation & Ors v Lenovo Group Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1583 (Pat) (04 July 2023)
  • Interdigital Technology Corp & Ors v Lenovo Group Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1577 (Pat) (28 June 2023)
  • Interdigital Technology Corporation & Ors v Lenovo Group Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1578 (Pat) (27 June 2023)
  • Parsons v Convatec Ltd [2023] EWHC 1535 (Pat) (26 June 2023)
  • Ensygnia IP Ltd v Shell Oil Products Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1495 (Pat) (26 June 2023)
  • Intercity Telecom Ltd & Anor v Solanki [2015] EWHC B3 (Mercantile) (27 February 2015)
  • Excelerate Technology Ltd v Cumberbatch & Anor [2015] EWHC B1 (Mercantile) (16 January 2015)
  • Knatchbull -Hugessen & Ors v SISU Capital Ltd (No 2) [2014] EWHC 1195 (Mercantile) (03 April 2014)
  • Knatchbull -Hugessen & Ors v SISU Capital Ltd [2014] EWHC 1194 (Mercantile) (02 April 2014)
  • Slick Seating Systems & Ors v Adams & Ors (Rev 1) [2013] EWHC B8 (Mercantile) (13 May 2013)
  • Safetynet Security Ltd v Coppage & Anor [2012] EWHC B11 (Mercantile) (15 August 2012)
  • AXA Insurance UK Plc v Thermonex Ltd [2012] EWHC B10 (Mercantile) (08 August 2012)
  • Andrew & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc [2012] EWHC B13 (Mercantile) (04 July 2012)
  • IG Markets Ltd v Crinion [2012] EWHC B4 (Mercantile) (03 April 2012)
  • Mortgage Agency Services Number Four Ltd. v Alomo Solicitors (a firm) [2011] EWHC B22 (Mercantile) (25 October 2011)
  • Mortgage Agency Services (Number 4) Ltd v Alomo Solicitors (a firm) [2012] EWHC B21 (Mercantile) (25 October 2011)
  • Baldwins (Ashby) Ltd v Maidstone [2011] EWHC B12 (Mercantile) (03 June 2011)
  • Harrison v Link Financial Ltd [2011] EWHC B3 (Mercantile) (28 February 2011)
  • Midland Packaging Ltd & Ors v HW Chartered Accountants (A Firm) [2010] EWHC B16 (Mercantile) (16 July 2010)
  • Gledhill v Bentley Designs (UK) Ltd [2010] EWHC B8 (Mercantile) (02 June 2010)
  • Welcome Financial Services Ltd v Nine Regions Ltd. (t/a Log Book Loans) [2010] EWHC B3 (Mercantile) (22 April 2010)
  • Sandhu (t/a Isher Fashions UK) v Jet Star Retail Ltd (t/a Mark One) & Ors [2010] EWHC B17 (Mercantile) (21 April 2010)
  • Midland Packaging Ltd & Ors v HW Accountants Ltd [2010] EWHC B15 (Mercantile) (21 January 2010)
  • West Wallasey Car Hire Ltd v Berkson & Berkson (A Firm) & Anor [2009] EWHC B39 (Mercantile) (11 December 2009)
  • Earles v Barclays Bank Plc [2009] EWHC 2500 (Mercantile) (08 October 2009)
  • Sivananthan v Vasikaran [2022] EWHC 2938 (KB) (18 November 2022)
  • Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council v Mailley [2022] EWHC 2328 (QB) (14 September 2022)
  • Al-Masarir v Kingdom of Saudi Arabia [2022] EWHC 2199 (QB) (19 August 2022)
  • Lonsdale & Ors v Wedlake Bell Llp & Ors [2022] EWHC 2169 (QB) (19 August 2022)
  • MXX v A Secondary School [2022] EWHC 2207 (QB) (19 August 2022)
  • Smith v Baker [2022] EWHC 2176 (QB) (17 August 2022)
  • Geo-Minerals GT Ltd & Anor v Downing & Ors [2022] EWHC 2151 (QB) (16 August 2022)
  • BES Commercial Electricity Ltd & Ors v Cheshire West And Chester Council [2022] EWHC 2162 (QB) (15 August 2022)
  • Bitar v Bank of Beirut SAL [2022] EWHC 2163 (QB) (15 August 2022)
  • Mincione v Rizzoli Corriere Della Sera Media Group SPA & Ors [2022] EWHC 2128 (QB) (12 August 2022)
  • Credico Marketing Ltd & Anor v Lambert & Ors (Costs) [2022] EWHC 2114 (QB) (08 August 2022)
  • Mega Trucking Company Ltd v Highways England Company Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 2099 (QB) (08 August 2022)
  • Pistachios In the Park Ltd & Anor v Sharn Panesar Ltd [2022] EWHC 2088 (QB) (03 August 2022)
  • MBR Acres Ltd & Ors v McGivern [2022] EWHC 2072 (QB) (02 August 2022)
  • Tewari v Khetarpal & Ors [2022] EWHC 2066 (QB) (01 August 2022)
  • Wright v McCormack [2022] EWHC 2068 (QB) (01 August 2022)
  • Watts v North Bristol NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 2048 (QB) (29 July 2022)
  • Vardy v Rooney [2022] EWHC 2017 (QB) (29 July 2022)
  • Evans v R&V Allgemeine Verischerung AG [2022] EWHC 2436 (QB) (29 July 2022)
  • Diag Human SE & Anor v Volterra Fietta (A Firm) [2022] EWHC 2054 (QB) (29 July 2022)
  • Smith v Clarke [2024] EWHC 322 (KB) (16 February 2024)
  • Woolley v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 304 (KB) (16 February 2024)
  • Shovlin v Careless & Ors [2024] EWHC 324 (KB) (16 February 2024)
  • Kuznetsov v War Group Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 311 (KB) (14 February 2024)
  • Roberts v Jones [2024] EWHC 290 (KB) (14 February 2024)
  • Morgan v Business Mortgage Finance 5 Plc [2024] EWHC 309 (KB) (14 February 2024)
  • The University Of Bristol v Abrahart [2024] EWHC 299 (KB) (14 February 2024)
  • Walker & Anor v JMount (t/a Take To Removals) [2024] EWHC 281 (KB) (12 February 2024)
  • Reveal Media Ltd v Dawes [2024] EWHC 285 (KB) (12 February 2024)
  • Hibbert & Anor v Hall [2024] EWHC 227 (KB) (08 February 2024)
  • Ignite International Brands (UK) Ltd & Anor v Inpero Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 220 (KB) (07 February 2024)
  • Stage v Government of the Commonwealth of Australia [2024] EWHC 245 (KB) (07 February 2024)
  • Buckinghamshire Council v Barrett & Ors (No. 2: Costs) [2024] EWHC 254 (KB) (07 February 2024)
  • Wintermute Trading Ltd v Terraform Labs Pte Ltd [2024] EWHC 141 (KB) (07 February 2024)
  • Pattinson v Winsor [2024] EWHC 230 (KB) (06 February 2024)
  • Al-Balhaa & Anor v RMG Residential Management Group Ltd [2024] EWHC 229 (KB) (06 February 2024)
  • Various Claimants v Nissan Motor Co Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 208 (KB) (05 February 2024)
  • GJC v Walker [2024] EWHC 182 (KB) (02 February 2024)
  • Chief Constable of Essex v Carter [2024] EWHC 126 (KB) (02 February 2024)
  • Trump v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd [2024] EWHC 173 (KB) (01 February 2024)
  • Topalsson GmbH v Rolls Royce Motor Cars Ltd [2024] EWHC 297 (TCC) (13 February 2024)
  • King John Bari-Iyiedum Berebon & Ors v Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria [2024] EWHC 276 (TCC) (12 February 2024)
  • Bellway Homes Ltd v Surgo Construction Ltd [2024] EWHC 269 (TCC) (12 February 2024)
  • WOL (London) LLP v Croydon Investments Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 251 (TCC) (09 February 2024)
  • CLS Civil Engineering Ltd v WJG Evans and Sons [2024] EWHC 194 (TCC) (02 February 2024)
  • Excelerate Technology Ltd v West Midlands Ambulance Service NHS University Foundation Trust & Anor (Re Disclosure Issues) [2024] EWHC 177 (TCC) (01 February 2024)
  • Lancashire Schools SPC Phase 2 Ltd v Lendlease Construction (Europe) Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 37 (TCC) (12 January 2024)
  • Innovate Pharmaceuticals Ltd v University of Portsmouth Higher Education Corporation [2024] EWHC 35 (TCC) (12 January 2024)
  • Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 23 (TCC) (11 January 2024)
  • Municipio de Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 3281 (TCC) (21 December 2023)
  • Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd [2023] EWHC 3219 (TCC) (15 December 2023)
  • Van Elle Ltd v Keynvor Morlift Ltd [2023] EWHC 3137 (TCC) (08 December 2023)
  • Iluminesia Ltd (t/a AlterEgo Facades) v RFL Facades Ltd [2023] EWHC 3122 (TCC) (06 December 2023)
  • IBM United Kingdom Ltd v LzLabs GmbH & Ors [2023] EWHC 3015 (TCC) (29 November 2023)
  • Lidl Great Britain Ltd v Closed Circuit Cooling Ltd (t/a 3cl) [2023] EWHC 3051 (TCC) (29 November 2023)
  • Bellway Homes Ltd v Surgo Construction Ltd [2024] EWHC 10 (TCC) (27 November 2023)
  • MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd v Outotec (USA) Inc & Anor (Rev2) [2023] EWHC 2885 (TCC) (17 November 2023)
  • Brookhouse Group Limited v Lancashire County Council [2023] EWHC 2921 (TCC) (17 November 2023)
  • Irwell Riverside Developments Ltd v Arcadis Consulting (UK) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2864 (TCC) (15 November 2023)
  • Bend Weld Engineering SDN BHD v FMC Technologies Ltd [2023] EWHC 2782 (TCC) (07 November 2023)
  • Powell, R. v [2024] EWHC 109 (SCCO) (24 January 2024)
  • Brazendale, R. v [2024] EWHC 108 (SCCO) (23 January 2024)
  • Donnelly, R. v [2024] EWHC 104 (SCCO) (22 January 2024)
  • Pipe, R. v [2024] EWHC 106 (SCCO) (22 January 2024)
  • Cave, R. v [2024] EWHC 107 (SCCO) (22 January 2024)
  • Arora Lodhi Heath Solicitors v The Lord Chancellor [2024] EWHC 103 (SCCO) (17 January 2024)
  • R v Knobel (Rev1) [2024] EWHC 20 (SCCO) (11 January 2024)
  • Ali, R. v [2024] EWHC 14 (SCCO) (09 January 2024)
  • R v Carr [2023] EWHC 3363 (SCCO) (21 December 2023)
  • Sellers v Simpkins [2023] EWHC 3296 (SCCO) (20 December 2023)
  • R v Ikhlaq [2023] EWHC 3279 (SCCO) (19 December 2023)
  • Avery, R. v [2023] EWHC 3131 (SCCO) (07 December 2023)
  • Chukwuka, R. v [2023] EWHC 3156 (SCCO) (07 December 2023)
  • R v Horsfall [2023] EWHC 3128 (SCCO) (05 December 2023)
  • Hakim, R. v [2023] EWHC 3129 (SCCO) (05 December 2023)
  • Hussain, R. v [2023] EWHC 3126 (SCCO) (04 December 2023)
  • Nikolla, R. v [2023] EWHC 3127 (SCCO) (01 December 2023)
  • Allen, R. v [2023] EWHC 3125 (SCCO) (01 December 2023)
  • R v Massey [2023] EWHC 3365 (SCCO) (29 November 2023)
  • R v Chapel [2023] EWHC 3364 (SCCO) (29 November 2023)
  • Jasim v Tesco Stores Ltd [2024] EW Misc 12 (CC) (12 February 2024)
  • Al Hashimi & Anor v Tesco Stores Ltd [2024] EW Misc 11 (CC) (12 February 2024)
  • Tesco Stores Ltd v Khattawi & Anor [2024] EW Misc 9 (CC) (09 February 2024)
  • Namdar v Tesco Stores Ltd [2024] EW Misc 10 (CC) (09 February 2024)
  • Reed v Tesco Stores Ltd [2024] EW Misc 7 (CC) (26 January 2024)
  • Collins v Tesco Stores Ltd [2024] EW Misc 8 (CC) (26 January 2024)
  • Chapman & Anor v Celtic Property Developments Ltd (Re Celtic Property Developments Ltd and Companies Act 2006) [2024] EW Misc 6 (CC) (24 January 2024)
  • Agia v Skipton Building Society [2024] EW Misc 5 (CC) (22 January 2024)
  • Abdulla v Tesco Stores Ltd & Anor [2024] EW Misc 3 (CC) (18 January 2024)
  • Sayahi & Anor v Tesco Stores Ltd & Anor [2024] EW Misc 4 (CC) (18 January 2024)
  • Injury Law Chambers Ltd v Adelco Screen Process Ltd [2024] EW Misc 2 (CC) (16 January 2024)
  • Richardson v Mid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust [2024] EW Misc 13 (CC) (15 January 2024)
  • Goulden v Milne [2024] EW Misc 1 (CC) (08 January 2024)
  • Jagpal & Anor v Chahal & Anor [2023] EW Misc 20 (CC) (22 November 2023)
  • Marshall v The Official Receiver (Rev1) [2023] EW Misc 21 (CC) (22 November 2023)
  • Alghafagi v Tesco Stores Ltd [2023] EW Misc 19 (CC) (17 November 2023)
  • Bahceci v Tesco Stores Ltd & Anor [2023] EW Misc 18 (CC) (17 November 2023)
  • Mouradi v Tesco Stores Ltd & Ors [2023] EW Misc 16 (CC) (17 November 2023)
  • Khan v Notting Hill Genesis [2023] EW Misc 14 (CC) (17 November 2023)
  • Morgan v Shah & Anor [2023] EW Misc 17 (CC) (17 November 2023)
  • Soci�t� Anonyme Des Bains De Mer Et Du Cercle Des �trangers � Monaco v Anglofile International Ltd (t/a Monte Carlo Casino Entertainment) [2013] EWPCC 38 (11 September 2013)
  • Regent University v Regent's University London [2013] EWPCC 39 (06 September 2013)
  • Scopema Sarl v Scot Seat Direct Ltd [2013] EWPCC 37 (31 July 2013)
  • Pintorex Ltd v Keyvanfar & Ors [2013] EWPCC 36 (30 July 2013)
  • Uwug Ltd & Anor v Ball (t/a Red) [2013] EWPCC 35 (30 July 2013)
  • Frost Products Ltd v F C Frost Ltd [2013] EWPCC 34 (26 July 2013)
  • Dawe v IDG Communications Ltd & Anor [2013] EWPCC 33 (18 July 2013)
  • Scopema Sarl v Scot Seat Direct Ltd [2013] EWPCC 32 (16 July 2013)
  • SDL Hair Ltd v Next Row Ltd & Ors [2013] EWPCC 31 (14 June 2013)
  • Orr -Adams (t/a Applied Concrete Systems, A Partnership) v Bailey (t/a G Bailey Services) [2013] EWPCC 30 (12 June 2013)
  • Satco Plastics Ltd v Super Pack Ltd & Anor [2013] EWPCC 29 (05 June 2013)
  • Abbott & Anor v Design & Display Ltd & Anor [2013] EWPCC 27 (30 May 2013)
  • Sealed Air Ltd v Sharp Interpack Ltd & Anor [2013] EWPCC 23 (30 May 2013)
  • Utopia Tableware Ltd v BBP Marketing Ltd & Anor [2013] EWPCC 28 (30 May 2013)
  • Allen v Redshaw [2013] EWPCC B1 (15 May 2013)
  • Sheldon v Daybrook House Promotions Ltd [2013] EWPCC 26 (08 May 2013)
  • Phil & Ted's Most Excellent Buggy Company Ltd v TFK Trends for Kids GmbH & Ors [2013] EWPCC 21 (08 May 2013)
  • Brigade (Bbs-Tek) Ltd v Amber Valley Ltd [2013] EWPCC 16 (19 April 2013)
  • Azzurri Communications Ltd v International Telecommunications Equipment Ltd (t/a SOS Communications) & Ors [2013] EWPCC 22 (16 April 2013)
  • Lizzanno Partitions (UK) Ltd v Interiors Manufacturing Ltd [2013] EWPCC 12 (11 April 2013)
  • MBM TRUSTEE COMPANY LTD AGAINST WILLIAM MOULTRIE [2024] ScotCS CSOH_14 (14 February 2024)
  • THE ENGINE YARD EDINBURGH LTD AND ANOTHER AGAINST BAYNE STEVENSON ASSOCIATES LTD [2024] ScotCS CSOH_13 (13 February 2024)
  • CHAD GRIFFIN AND THOMAS CAMPBELL MACLENNAN AS JOINT ADMINISTRATORS OF ALEXANDER INGLIS AND SON LTD [2024] ScotCS CSOH_12 (09 February 2024)
  • WILDCAT HAVEN COMMUNITY INTEREST COMPANY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW [2024] ScotCS CSOH_10 (08 February 2024)
  • LEANDER CB CONSULTANTS LTD T/A LEANDER ADVISORS AGAINST BOGSIDE INVESTMENTS LTD AND ANOTHER [2024] ScotCS CSOH_9 (02 February 2024)
  • PETITION BY THE PRESIDING CORONER OF NORTHERN IRELAND AGAINST SOLDIER F [2024] ScotCS CSOH_11 (02 February 2024)
  • IB AGAINST THE GENERAL MEDICAL COUNCIL [2024] ScotCS CSIH_4 (01 February 2024)
  • MOHAMMED ISMAEL SULIMAN ABDULLAH FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW [2024] ScotCS CSOH_8 (31 January 2024)
  • ALAN KING AGAINST BLACK HORSE LTD AND ANOTHER [2024] ScotCS CSIH_3 (31 January 2024)
  • MAURICE YOUSEFF FAWAZ AGAINST ELAINE PATRICIA HARGREAVES OR FAWAZ [2024] ScotCS CSOH_7 (30 January 2024)
  • GORDON BURNS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE SYSTEM OPERATED BY THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS TO GRANT HIM HIS FIRST GRANT OF TEMPORARY RELEASE [2024] ScotCS CSOH_6 (25 January 2024)
  • UK GRID SOLUTIONS LTD AND ANOTHER AGAINST SCOTTISH HYDRO ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION PLC [2024] ScotCS CSOH_5 (24 January 2024)
  • LAURA McCLUSKEY AGAINST SCOTT WILSON SCOTLAND LIMITED [2024] ScotCS CSOH_4 (23 January 2024)
  • THOMAS AND GAIL CHALMERS AGAINST DIAGEO SCOTLAND LTD [2024] ScotCS CSIH_2 (19 January 2024)
  • ADRIAN RICHARD HAWKINS OBE AND ANOTHER FOR AN ORDER UNDER SECTIONS 994 AND 996 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2006 IN RELATION TO SUSTAINABLE PIPELINE SYSTEMS LTD [2024] ScotCS CSOH_3 (19 January 2024)
  • APPLICATIONS TO BE A REPRESENTATIVE PARTY IN GROUP PROCEEDINGS AND FOR PERMISSION TO BRING GROUP PROCEEDINGS BY LEE BRIDGEHOUSE AGAINST BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT [2024] ScotCS CSOH_2 (18 January 2024)
  • BUREAU WORKSPACE LTD AGAINST ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR THE COMMISSIONERS OF HMRC [2024] ScotCS CSOH_1 (11 January 2024)
  • GALBRAITH TRAWLERS LTD AGAINST THE ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND (AS REPRESENTING THE HOME OFFICE) [2024] ScotCS CSIH_1 (10 January 2024)
  • APPEAL BY CHARLES BATHGATE AGAINST TECHNIP SINGAPORE PTE LTD [2023] ScotCS CSIH_48 (29 December 2023)
  • RECLAIMING MOTION BY DEPUY INTERNATIONAL LTD AGAINST ELIZABETH GILCHRIST [2023] ScotCS CSIH_47 (28 December 2023)
  • APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE BY JORDAN MITCHELL AGAINST HIS MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [2024] ScotHC HCJAC_8 (08 February 2024)
  • APPEAL BY DAVID DI PINTO AGAINST PF GLASGOW [2024] ScotHC HCJAC_7 (02 February 2024)
  • NOTE OF APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE BY ANDREW GEORGE MILLER AGAINST HMA [2024] ScotHC HCJAC_3 (31 January 2024)
  • APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL UNDER SECTION 26 OF THE EXTRADITION ACT 2003 BY VINCENT RAYNOUARD AGAINST HMA (REPRESENTING THE FRENCH REPUBLIC) [2024] ScotHC HCJAC_2 (26 January 2024)
  • APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION BY JOHN MATTHEW FINDLAYSON BROWN AGAINST HMA [2024] ScotHC HCJAC_4 (18 January 2024)
  • MELANIE GRIERSON AGAINST HIS MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_52 (15 December 2023)
  • APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION BY FRANCIS MOONEY AGAINST HMA [2024] ScotHC HCJAC_1 (14 December 2023)
  • APPEAL BY NICHOLAS ROSSI AGAINST HIS MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_50 (14 December 2023)
  • SCOTT FAULKNER AGAINST HIS MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_49 (13 December 2023)
  • APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION BY SS AGAINST HMA [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_48 (28 November 2023)
  • LAWRENCE PHEE AGAINST HIS MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_47 (21 November 2023)
  • CROWN APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE BY HIS MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_45 (21 November 2023)
  • APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE BY NORMAN BOWMAN AGAINST HMA [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_46 (17 November 2023)
  • APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION BY DM AGAINST HMA [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_44 (31 October 2023)
  • HIS MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE AGAINST RM [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_43 (27 October 2023)
  • AARON CAMPBELL LIND AGAINST HMA [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_51 (23 October 2023)
  • REFERENCE BY HMA AGAINST CLB [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_40 (18 October 2023)
  • APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE BY JAMIE RICHARD JOHN WAUGH GEORGE [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_38 (13 October 2023)
  • SEAN ROBIN JAMES HOGG AGAINST HMA [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_37 (11 October 2023)
  • APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL UNDER SECTION 26 OF THE EXTRADITION ACT 2003 BY AH AGAINST THE LORD ADVOCATE [2023] ScotHC HCJAC_36 (03 October 2023)
  • MRS VIOLET MAY MILLAR OR PRINGLE AGAINST DONALD STEWART WIGHTMAN [2024] SC EDIN 6 (02 February 2024)
  • ANDREW GILCHRIST AGAINST GOVAN DENTAL CENTRE AND RABIAH IQBAL [2024] SC GLA 5 (26 January 2024)
  • AB AGAINST CB [2024] SC AIR 4 (10 January 2024)
  • CHRISTOPHER KNAPMAN & PATRICK WADESON [2024] SC JED 3 (09 January 2024)
  • AB AGAINST CD [2024] SC KDY 2 (09 January 2024)
  • SCREWFIX DIRECT Ltd T/A TRADE UK AGAINST MR JAMES AKA JAMIE PATERSON [2024] SC HAM 1 (03 January 2024)
  • ROSE AMZALEG & ANOTHER AGAINST HASTINGS INSURANCE SERVICES LTD [2023] SC HAM 39 (22 November 2023)
  • GRAHAM BRUCE SOMERVILLE AGAINST ALASDAIR RODERICK ALLAN AS EXECUTRIX NOMINATE OF THE LATE JOSEPHINE MARGARET ALLAN AND AS AN INDIVIDUAL [2023] SC EDIN 38 (14 November 2023)
  • ID AGAINST KC [2023] SC FOR 37 (10 November 2023)
  • LM AGAINST AM [2023] SC ABE 34 (31 October 2023)
  • G AGAINST H [2023] SC GLA 33 (31 October 2023)
  • CERTAS ENERGY UK LTD AGAINST SOUTH LANARKSHIRE LICENSING BOARD [2023] SC GLA 29 (22 September 2023)
  • PETITION BY SUSAN GORDAN FOR APPOINTMENT AS EXECUTRIX DATIVE [2023] SC ABE 26 (06 September 2023)
  • INVERLOCHY CASTLE MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL Ltd AGAINST ARCHIE MacDONALD & Anor [2023]SC DUN 25 (06 September 2023)
  • RICHARD GOURLAY AGAINST LORNA CLARK [2023] SC DUN 23 (09 August 2023)
  • KEVIN McKENZIE AGAINST THE CITY OF EDINBURGH COUNCIL AND THE BANK OF SCOTLAND [2023] SC EDIN 21 (08 August 2023)
  • APPEALS BY LD AND MD AGAINST AUTHORITY REPORTER [2023] SC STI 22 (28 July 2023)
  • APPLICATION IN RELATION TO A "THE ADULT" BY FIONA BROWN, PUBLIC GUARDIAN [2023] SC EDIN 16 (24 May 2023)
  • DM AGAINST JH [2023] SC KRK 15 (17 May 2023)
  • PAUL JAMES DUNCAN CURRAN AGAINST B&P SCAFFOLDING Ltd & Anor [2023] SC EDIN 14 (25 April 2023)
  • APPEAL BY CHARLES FINDLAY McINALLY v ARCHIBALD MILLIGAN McINALLY Jr [2024] ScotSAC Civ 5 (06 February 2024)
  • JACQUELINE WALLACE MARTINEZ AND ANOTHER v JANICE FERGUSSON NISBET AND OTHERS [2024] ScotSAC Civ 4 (31 January 2024)
  • BARRY SCOTT v KATE FRAME, POLICE INVESTIGATIONS & REVIEW COMMISSIONER [2024] ScotSAC Civ 3 (31 January 2024)
  • APPEAL IN THE CAUSE EH1 PROPERTIES LIMITED v ALEXANDRA MARY MACLEAN OR ROBERTS AND OTHERS [2023] ScotSAC Civ 35 (15 December 2023)
  • KATIE CHARLOTTE ELLEN SMITH OR BRYCE v DAVID MARK BRYCE [2023] ScotSAC Civ 36 (01 December 2023)
  • ARDNAMURCHAN ESTATES LIMITED v MICHAEL ROY MACGREGOR and KAREN JUDITH MACGREGOR [2023] ScotSAC Civ 33 (01 December 2023)
  • APPEAL BY ANGUS COUNCIL v GUILD HOMES (TAYSIDE) LIMITED [2023] ScotSAC Civ 32 (24 November 2023)
  • APPEAL BY BANK OF SCOTLAND v CROWN OFFICE AND PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE AND OTHERS [2023] ScotSAC Civ 34 (22 November 2023)
  • APPEAL IN THE CAUSE TH v VH [2023] ScotSAC Civ 31 (07 November 2023)
  • ID v KC [2023] ScotSAC Civ 30 (20 September 2023)
  • F v M [2023] ScotSAC Civ 29 (12 September 2023)
  • RIAD DJENNAS (AP) v GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL [2023] ScotSAC Civ 28 (11 August 2023)
  • BALBIR KAUR CHALL v JASBIR SINGH CHALL, THE CHALL PARTNERSHIP, HARDEEP SINGH CHALL, HARDEEP SINGH CHALL, BURINDER KAUR SANDHU AND SUMAN KAUR RAI, AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DECEASED JAGWINDER SINGH CHALL [2023] ScotSAC Civ 27 (01 August 2023)
  • J (AP) v GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL [2023] ScotSAC Civ 25 (30 July 2023)
  • J(AP) v THE GLASGOW HOUSING ASSOCIATION LIMITED [2023] ScotSAC Civ 26 (30 July 2023)
  • APPEAL IN THE CAUSE GRAHAM FERGUSON AND ANOTHER v BARBARA GREGORS AND OTHERS [2023] ScotSAC Civ 24 (05 July 2023)
  • ROGER McCALLUM v ALAN MACDONALD MORRISON [2023] ScotSAC Civ 23 (19 June 2023)
  • CRERAR HOTEL GROUP LIMITED v OBAN REGENT MANAGEMENT LIMITED [2023] ScotSAC Civ 22 (04 June 2023)
  • JH v SCOTTISH CHILDREN'S REPORTER ADMINISTRATION [2023] ScotSAC Civ 21 (29 May 2023)
  • ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND plc v MOHAMMED ASLAM AND ANOTHER [2023] ScotSAC Civ 20 (11 May 2023)
  • APPEAL v SENTENCE BY RYAN DOCHERTY v PF ABERDEEN [2023] ScotSAC Crim 11 (18 October 2023)
  • CROWN APPEAL v SENTENCE IN SB v PF ABERDEEN [2023] ScotSAC Crim 9 (13 October 2023)
  • APPEAL BY STATED CASE v CONVICTION BY GARY KELLY v PF ABERDEEN [2023] ScotSAC Crim 10 (13 October 2023)
  • APPEAL BY STATED CASE v CONVICTION BY BHUPINDER SINGH v PROCURATOR FISCAL, KILMARNOCK [2023] ScotSAC Crim 6 (06 October 2023)
  • APPEAL BY STATED CASE v CONVICTION BY DAVID DI PINTO v PROCURATOR FISCAL, GLASGOW [2023] ScotSAC Crim 7 (06 October 2023)
  • APPEAL v SENTENCE BY BRADLEY YOUNG v PROCURATOR FISCAL, ABERDEEN [2023] ScotSAC Crim 8 (06 October 2023)
  • APPEAL BY STATED CASE v CONVICTION BY AB v PF HAMILTON [2023] ScotSAC Crim 5 (01 September 2023)
  • APPEAL v CONVICTION BY PAUL MATTHEWS v PF ABERDEEN [2023] ScotSAC Crim 13 (07 August 2023)
  • PF PETERHEAD v BRANDON DOUGLAS AND JOHN POW [2023] ScotSAC Crim 4 (25 April 2023)
  • APPEAL BY JACK DICKSON v PF KILMARNOCK [2023] ScotSAC Crim 3 (18 April 2023)
  • APPEAL BY STATED CASE BY KEVIN BOWIE v PF FALKIRK [2023] ScotSAC Crim 2 (28 March 2023)
  • APPEAL BY DF v PROCURATOR FISCAL DUNDEE [2023] ScotSAC Crim 1 (22 February 2023)
  • APPEAL BY SCOTLAND JAMES JOHN WALKER PF DUNOON [2022] ScotSAC Crim 9 (20 December 2022)
  • CROWN BILL OF ADVOCATION BY PF GLASGOW v RYAN COOPER [2022] ScotSAC Crim 8 (09 December 2022)
  • STATED CASE BY FAISAL AZIZ [2022] ScotSAC Crim 7 (30 August 2022)
  • APPEAL BY STATED CASE v CONVICTION BY AM v PROCURATOR FISCAL, AIRDRIE [2022] ScotSAC Crim 6 (24 May 2022)
  • TIMOTHY HUMPHREYS v PROCURATOR FISCAL ABERDEEN [2022] ScotSAC Crim 5 (19 April 2022)
  • CROWN APPEAL BY PF FALKIRK v BM [2023] ScotSAC Crim 12 (05 April 2022)
  • CRISTIAN PICCO v THE PF, EDINBURGH [2022] ScotSAC Crim 4 (19 March 2022)
  • APPEAL v SENTENCE BY WILLIAM HUTCHISON [2022] ScotSAC Crim 3 (09 March 2022)
  • Aberdeen City Council (Business case for proposed "Energy Transition Zone" near to Aberdeen South Harbour) [2023] ScotIC 113_2023 (27 November 2023)
  • Scottish Ministers (Lochaber Smelter: Total fee paid to date by GFG Alliance under the Guarantee and Reimbursement Agreement) [2023] ScotIC 112_2023 (23 November 2023)
  • Orkney Islands Council (Information relating to harbour and port occupancy in Orkney) [2023] ScotIC 111_2023 (13 November 2023)
  • Borders Health Board (Complaints of deliberate deprivation of medical devices to disabled patients with suspected COVID 19) [2023] ScotIC 109_2023 (09 November 2023)
  • Police Service of Scotland (Incidents involving specific named religious groups) [2023] ScotIC 108_2023 (09 November 2023)
  • NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (Pay rises for resuscitating or supplying life-saving equipment to patients) [2023] ScotIC 110_2023 (09 November 2023)
  • Police Service of Scotland (Criminal complaints/allegations - failure to respond) [2023] ScotIC 107_2023 (02 November 2023)
  • Scottish Prison Service (Suspension of prisoners’ recreational activity) [2023] ScotIC 106_2023 (25 October 2023)
  • Scottish Parliament (Burntisland Fabrications Ltd: communications between the Finance Committee and the Scottish Government) [2023] ScotIC 102_2023 (13 October 2023)
  • East Renfrewshire Council (Planning information: applications previously published online) [2023] ScotIC 103_2023 (13 October 2023)
  • Scottish Enterprise (Loans and grants advanced to companies within the GFG Alliance) [2023] ScotIC 105_2023 (13 October 2023)
  • University of Edinburgh (Emails, notes, minutes and transcripts of conversations between named individuals) [2023] ScotIC 104_2023 (12 October 2023)
  • University of Edinburgh (Records held relating to a research project) [2023] ScotIC 101_2023 (12 October 2023)
  • Glasgow City Council (Transfer and housing of asylum seekers in Glasgow) [2023] ScotIC 093_2023 (31 August 2023)
  • Scottish Ministers (Allegations of inappropriate conduct by former First Minister, Alex Salmond) [2023] ScotIC 092_2023 (30 August 2023)
  • Scottish Ministers (2021 Exams diet and alternative certification model) [2023] ScotIC 085_2023 (28 August 2023)
  • City of Edinburgh Council (Communications supporting assertion about sole trustee of Lauriston Castle Trust) [2023] ScotIC 090_2023 (24 August 2023)
  • Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Porosity tests and matters relating to soakaway at named location) [2023] ScotIC 089_2023 (21 August 2023)
  • Scottish Ministers (Advice relating to the nuclear deterrent) [2023] ScotIC 087_2023 (15 August 2023)
  • Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Garmouth outfall) [2023] ScotIC 088_2023 (14 August 2023)
  • CD, R. v [2024] NICA 9 (09 February 2024)
  • The King v Paul Martin McKerr [2024] NICA 8 (01 February 2024)
  • Watson v Police Service of Northern Ireland [2024] NICA 7 (23 January 2024)
  • McCloskey v General Medical Council [2024] NICA 6 (19 January 2024)
  • The King v Cullen Asbestos Ltd [2024] NICA 5 (19 January 2024)
  • Brewsterv The Northern Ireland Courts and Tribunals Service & Anor [2024] NICA 10 (18 January 2024)
  • Sholdis, R. v [2024] NICA 4 (15 January 2024)
  • Pacyno, R. v [2024] NICA 3 (12 January 2024)
  • Edmund Sinclair v Fiona Jane Sinclair [2024] NICA 2 (08 January 2024)
  • AU v Belfast Health And Social Care Trust [2024] NICA 1 (05 January 2024)
  • McKinney, R. v [2023] NICA 84 (15 December 2023)
  • Smith, R. v [2023] NICA 86 (14 December 2023)
  • Mitchell v The Defence Council & Anor [2023] NICA 82 (11 December 2023)
  • Miller, R. v (Rev2) [2023] NICA 81 (04 December 2023)
  • McAteer & Anor v McElhinney & Ors (t/a "McElhinney, McDaid & Hegarty" Solicitors) (Rev1) [2023] NICA 72 (15 November 2023)
  • McKeever, R. v (Re Appeal Against Conviction) [2023] NICA 73 (14 November 2023)
  • Markey, R. v [2023] NICA 70 (13 November 2023)
  • Creaney, R. v [2023] NICA 75 (10 November 2023)
  • Devlin, R. v (Rev1) [2023] NICA 71 (10 November 2023)
  • McGrillen, R. v [2023] NICA 68 (09 November 2023)
  • Department for the Economy v Burns (Re Company Directors Disqualification (Northern Ireland) Order 2002) [2023] NICh 7 (17 October 2023)
  • Santander UK Plc v Carlin & Anor [2023] NICh 5 (16 June 2023)
  • Drennan & Anor v Walsh [2023] NICh 6 (28 April 2023)
  • Larmour v Larmour [2023] NICh 4 (26 April 2023)
  • Assured Energy LLP Pollock & Anor [2023] NICh 2 (24 March 2023)
  • McQuaid v McQuaid (Rev1) [2023] NICh 1 (11 January 2023)
  • Finlay & Anor v Finlay [2022] NICh 19 (12 December 2022)
  • McQuaid v McQuaid & Ors (Re Estate of Terence Benedict McQuaid) [2022] NICh 18 (23 November 2022)
  • Judge v Waugh [2022] NICh 16 (27 October 2022)
  • Murray v O'Reilly Stewart Solicitors Ltd & Ors (Rev1) [2022] NICh 20 (14 October 2022)
  • Braniff v Braniff [2022] NICh 15 (29 September 2022)
  • Courtney v Lappin [2022] NICh 14 (07 September 2022
  • Pepper v Pyper [2022] NICh 13 (30 June 2022)
  • McConkey & Ors v Egerton & Ors (Re Will Trusts of Thomas Henry Egerton) [2022] NICh 11 (16 June 2022)
  • In the Matter of Bedford Hotel Ltd (In Administration) (Rev1) [2022] NICh 10 (14 June 2022)
  • McKee v Carson & Anor [2022] NICh 9 (10 June 2022)
  • Ulster Bank Ltd v Taggart & Anor [2022] NICh 8 (01 June 2022)
  • Trimble & Anor v Cassidy & Anor [2022] NICh 7 (29 April 2022)
  • McKee v McKee [2022] NICh 6 (08 April 2022)
  • McFarland v Burnside [2022] NICh 5 (07 April 2022)
  • Okotete's Application [2024] NIDiv 1 (12 February 2024)
  • McDonagh, Re Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIDiv 4 (12 December 2023)
  • McCann, Re Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIDIV 3 (10 July 2023)
  • Brady, Re Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIDIV 1 (29 June 2023)
  • Torac v Czech Republic [2023] NIDIV 2 (28 June 2023)
  • A Health and Social Care Trust v A Mother and A Father (Re: female twins) [2024] NIFam 1 (12 February 2024)
  • A Mother v A Health and Social Care Trust and The Child and Family Agency [2023] NIFam 25 (21 December 2023)
  • A Health and Social Care Trust v A Mother and A Father in the matter of three children C4, C5 AND C6 [2023] NIFam 23 (13 December 2023)
  • A Heath and Social Care Trust v A Mother & Anor (In the Matter of A Female Child Aged 6 Years 10 Months) [2023] NIFam 22 (11 December 2023)
  • GE, In the Matter Of (A Female Child Aged 4 Years) [2023] NIFam 21 (29 November 2023)
  • A Mother and A Father and In the Matter of the Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995 [2023] NIFam 19 (22 November 2023)
  • Sinclair v Sinclair [2023] NIFam 18 (13 November 2023)
  • A Health & Social Care Trust v A Patient & Anor [2023] NIFam 15 (10 November 2023)
  • CT, In the Matter Of (An Eight Year Old Female Child) [2023] NIFam 17 (08 November 2023)
  • Belfast Health & Social Care Trust v AP & Anor [2023] NIFam 16 (27 October 2023)
  • A Mother v A Health and Social Care Trust & Anor (Re AM's application to extend time to appeal) [2023] NIFam 14 (19 October 2023)
  • A Female Child (Aged 11 Years), In the Matter Of [2023] NIFam 13 (25 September 2023)
  • Health and Social Care Trust v JU (Rev1) [2023] NIFam 12 (07 August 2023)
  • RO (A Male Child Aged 18 Months), In the Matter Of [2023] NIFam 11 (28 July 2023)
  • GA (A Female Child Aged 13 Months), In the Matter Of [2023] NIFam 9 (31 May 2023)
  • A Mother and A Health and Social Care Trust and in the matter of AB (A male child) [2023] NFam 7 (21 April 2023)
  • Stelfox v Stelfox [2023] NIFam 6 (28 March 2023)
  • TY (No 2) (A Child ) [2023] NIFam 5 (21 March 2023)
  • AB (A Minor), In the Matter Of (Rev1) [2023] NIFam 4 (24 February 2023)
  • Belfast Health and Social Care Trust v KL (The Patient) & Ors [2023] NIFam 3 (14 February 2023)
  • JR295, Re Application for Judicial Review (Leave stage) [2024] NIKB 7 (15 February 2024)
  • Sheehy, Application for Judicial Review [2024] NIKB 5 (06 February 2024)
  • Children's Law Centre, Application for Judicial Review [2024] NIKB 4 (31 January 2024)
  • Belkovic, Application for Judicial Review [2024] NIKB 2 (23 January 2024)
  • McClarnon v The Sisters of Nazareth [2024] NIKB 3 (19 January 2024)
  • Johnston, Application for Judicial Review [2024] NIKB 1 (04 January 2024)
  • Deeney, Re Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 122 (20 December 2023)
  • Donegan, Application for Judicial Review (Re Costs) [2023] NIKB 126 (15 December 2023)
  • JR222 (No. 2), Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 121 (14 December 2023)
  • Murphy, Re Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 119 (08 December 2023)
  • Morgan, Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 118 (29 November 2023)
  • McDonagh, Re Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 116 (17 November 2023)
  • Dadzi, Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 113 (17 November 2023)
  • JR267, Re Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 112 (17 November 2023)
  • Frane, Re Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 108 (15 November 2023)
  • JR276 (A Patient), Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 107 (15 November 2023)
  • Falls v Lidl Northern Ireland Ltd (Rev1) [2023] NIKB 115 (08 November 2023)
  • Friel, Application for Judicial Review (Re Inquest into the Death of Thomas Friel) [2023] NIKB 111 (06 November 2023)
  • JR195, Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 105 (27 October 2023)
  • C Short Limited's Application [2023] NIKB 104 (26 October 2023)
  • Gaeilge, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 56 (26 August 2022)
  • Watson, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 59 (26 August 2022)
  • Marks, Re Application for Judicial Review (Rev1) [2022] NIQB 57 (26 August 2022)
  • Prosecutor's General Office of the Republic of Latvia v Kilgasts (Rev1) [2022] NIQB 60 (22 August 2022)
  • JR154, JR155 and JR156's (all minors) and their Next Friends Applications (Leave stage) [2022] NIQB 54 (15 July 2022)
  • JR188, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 55 (15 July 2022)
  • JR87, Re Application for Judicial Review (Rev1) [2022] NIQB 53 (05 July 2022)
  • JR188, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 55 (5 July 2022)
  • SM Pigs Ltd v Karro Food Group Ltd [2022] NIQB 51 (30 June 2022)
  • Wright, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 50 (30 June 2022)
  • Keys v The Police Service of Northern Ireland [2022] NIQB 52 (29 June 2022)
  • Irvine, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 49 (29 June 2022)
  • JR180, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 48 (23 June 2022)
  • Duffy, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 47 (21 June 2022)
  • Stewart, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 63 (14 June 2022)
  • JR138, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 46 (13 June 2022)
  • Stuart, Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 45 (13 June 2022)
  • Czerwonobroda, Re Application for Leave to appeal against Extradition [2022] NIQB 44 (10 June 2022)
  • Sterritt v Telegraph Media Group Ltd & Ors [2022] NIQB 43 (09 June 2022)
  • JR123, Re Application for Judicial Review [2022] NIQB 42 (09 June 2022)
  • Kelly v O'Doherty [2024] NIMaster 1 (08 January 2024)
  • McGivern v South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust (Rev1) [2023] NIMaster 13 (14 December 2023)
  • Maguire v Western Education and Library Board [2023] NIMaster 11 (30 November 2023)
  • Davison & Associates (NI) Ltd v Admiral Care Services (NI) Ltd & Anor[2023] NIMaster 10 (24 November 2023)
  • O'Neill v South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust (Defamation) (Rev1) [2023] NIMaster 9 (07 November 2023)
  • Norbev Ltd v CSI Hungary KFT [2023] NIMaster 7 (20 October 2023)
  • Cardy v Belfast Health Social Care Trust & Ors [2023] NIMaster 8 (13 October 2023)
  • Seales v Seales (Ancillary Relief: Murder and Coercive Control as Conduct) (Rev1) [2023] NIMaster 6 (29 August 2023)
  • Kerr v The Department of Health, Social Services, and Public Safety & Ors [2023] NIMaster 5 (16 August 2023)
  • Holbeach v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (Rev1) [2023] NIMaster 4 (13 April 2023)
  • Duffy v Duffy [2023] NIMaster 2 (09 February 2023)
  • Joseph Braddell & Son Ltd v Zurich Insurance Public Liability Company [2023] NIMaster 1 (09 January 2023)
  • Murphy v Casey and Casey Solicitors & Ors (Rev2) [2022] NIMaster 12 (22 December 2022)
  • Martin ( A Bankrupt), In the Matter Of [2022] NIMaster 10 (12 December 2022)
  • Nesbitt & Anor v Swann & Ors [2022] NIMaster 8 (25 November 2022)
  • Southern Health and Social Care Trust v Tennyson [2022] NIMaster 7 (24 November 2022)
  • English v Braniff [2022] NIMaster 6 (31 October 2022)
  • Terex GB Ltd v Mulholland & Anor [2022] NIMaster 3 (23 August 2022)
  • Gordon & Ors v Ulster Bank Ltd & Ors [2022] NIMaster 5 (28 June 2022)
  • McWilliams v Police Service of Northern Ireland [2022] NIMaster 2 (21 April 2022)
  • Smyth, R. v (Re Application of No Case to Answer) [2024] NICC 3 (09 January 2024)
  • Bond, R. v (Rev1) [2024] NICC 2 (09 January 2024)
  • Nowak, R. v (Rev1) [2023] NICC 34 (08 December 2023)
  • McKee, R. v (Rev1) [2023] NICC 32 (06 December 2023)
  • Reilly & Anor (Sentencing Remarks) [2023] NICC 31 (01 December 2023)
  • Craig, R. v [2023] NICC 36 (27 November 2023)
  • Queen v Stephen McKinney [2021] NICC 10 (25 November 2023)
  • The King v James Stewart Smyth [2023] NICC 30 (30 October 2023)
  • The King v James Stewart Smyth [2023] NICC 29 (30 October 2023)
  • McNeill, R. v [2023] NICC 28 (13 October 2023)
  • Brown & Ors, R. v (Re Application for a No Bill) [2023] NICC 25 (15 September 2023)
  • Fox, R. v [2023] NICC 23 (17 August 2023)
  • Rainey, R. v [2023] NICC 22 (05 July 2023)
  • Brown & Ors, R. v (Re Ruling on Application for No Bill) [2023] NICC 20 (30 June 2023)
  • Gill & Ors, R. v [2023] NICC 21 (22 June 2023)
  • Wahab & Anor, R. v (Sentencing Remarks) [2023] NICC 16 (21 June 2023)
  • Reynolds & Ors [2023] NICC 18 (16 June 2023)
  • XX, R. v [2023] NICC 14 (21 May 2023)
  • Perry, R. v [2023] NICC 12 (17 May 2023)
  • LG, R. v [2023] NICC 13 (11 May 2023)
  • O'Brien v HM Revenue & Customs (Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIIT 01929_22it (22 August 2022)
  • Keenan v O'Hares Vivo Xtra Warrenpoint ... (Breach of Contract) [2022] NIIT 15900_22IT (22 August 2022)
  • Waide v Caterpillar Logistics (UK) Lim... (Breach of Contract Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIIT 17567_20IT (22 August 2022)
  • Davison v G4S Secure Solutions (UK) Ltd (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIIT 01813_22IT (22 August 2022)
  • McMurray v National Museums Northern Irel... (Discrimination - Disability Discrimination - Sex Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIIT 21039_21it (22 August 2022)
  • Gilroy v The Leuven institute for Irela... (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages Other) [2022] NIIT 29964_21IT (19 August 2022)
  • Copeland v Belfast Health and Social Care... (Discrimination - Age Breach of Contract Unauthorised Deduction of Wages Unfair Dismissal Other) [2022] NIIT 10993_19IT (18 August 2022)
  • Dickson v Pronto Distributions Ltd (Breach of Contract Redundancy Payment Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIIT 26866_20IT (18 August 2022)
  • Dickson v Paul Cullen T/A Danzas Fashion... Danzas Fashions NI Limited (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIIT 20595_20IT (18 August 2022)
  • McArdle v Armagh Garages Limited T/A McK... Paul Gordon (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages Other) [2022] NIIT 11121_21IT (18 August 2022)
  • O'Callaghan v Northern Trust South Eastern Trust Southern Trust Western Trust (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIIT 00587_20IT (18 August 2022)
  • Hurson v Northern Trust South Eastern Trust Southern Trust Western Trust (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIIT 00517_20IT (18 August 2022)
  • Irvine v Green Roofs Ireland Limited (Unfair Dismissal Other) [2022] NIIT 06371_21IT (18 August 2022)
  • McComish v Northern Ireland Railway Compa... (Discrimination - Disability Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIIT 11123_22IT (17 August 2022)
  • McKeown v Hyde Park Ireland Ltd (Breach of Contract Other) [2022] NIIT 12462_22IT (16 August 2022)
  • Robb v Concept Services (NI) LTD (Breach of Contract Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIIT 48193_21IT (15 August 2022)
  • McCann v Belfast International Airport ... (Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIIT 13193_22IT (15 August 2022)
  • O'Hara v Royal Mail Group Limited (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIIT 26864_20IT (15 August 2022)
  • McAuley v Royal Mail Group Limited (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIIT 26863_20IT (15 August 2022)
  • Muzolf v Belfast City Council (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIIT 12433_22IT (15 August 2022)
  • 1 v Chief Constable of the Police (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIFET 00023_17FET (16 August 2022)
  • Noble v Northern Health and Social Car (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unauthorised Deduction of Wages Other) [2022] NIFET 00105_21FET (15 August 2022)
  • Slevin v Driver & Vehicle Agency ... (Discrimination - Age Discrimination - Disability Discrimination - Part Time Working Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion) [2022] NIFET 00124_21FET (12 August 2022)
  • Forsythe v Xerox (UK) Ltd (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIFET 00007_22FET (12 August 2022)
  • Murray v Police Service of Northern Ire... (Discrimination - Age Discrimination - Disability Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Discrimination - Sex Discrimination - Sexual Orientation Other) [2022] NIFET 00111_21FET (12 August 2022)
  • Chalkley v P2P Customs Ltd (Discrimination - Race Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Breach of Contract Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIFET 00024_22FET (03 August 2022)
  • Deans v Clearway Ltd Paul Murphy Ken Ewing Joe Monaghan Clearway Ltd (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Discrimination - Sex Unfair Dismissal Other) [2022] NIFET 00126_21FET (22 July 2022)
  • McGarry v Staffline Recruitment NI Causeway Coast and Glens Borou... Staffline Recruitment NI Causeway Coast and Glens Borou... (Discrimination - Disability Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unfair Dismissal Other) [2022] NIFET 00125_21FET (21 July 2022)
  • McManus v Evron Foods Limited BF Europe LLC (Unfair Dismissal Other Discrimination - Age Discrimination - Race Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Discrimination - Sex Breach of Contract) [2022] NIFET 00004_22FET (14 July 2022)
  • Kilpatrick v Terex GB Limited (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Breach of Contract Redundancy Payment Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIFET 00081_21FET (08 July 2022)
  • Calil v Wilson James Limited (Discrimination - Race Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIFET 00605_20FET (05 July 2022)
  • O'Dea v Search Workshop Supplies Ltd (Unauthorised Deduction of Wages Unfair Dismissal Other Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Breach of Contract Redundancy Payment) [2022] NIFET 00082_21FET (05 July 2022)
  • Shevlin v Charles Hurst Limited (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIFET 00089_21FET (23 June 2022)
  • Lavery v Septodont UK Ltd (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unfair Dismissal Other Discrimination - Age Discrimination - Race) [2022] NIFET 00015_22FET (23 June 2022)
  • Hughes v Charles Hurst Limited (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIFET 00087_21FET (22 June 2022)
  • Johnston v Charles Hurst Limited (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIFET 00102_21FET (22 June 2022)
  • McKenna v Charles Hurst Limited (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIFET 00088_21FET (22 June 2022)
  • Doherty v Bouygues E&S Contracting Limit... (Discrimination - Disability Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unfair Dismissal) [2022] NIFET 00128_21FET (16 June 2022)
  • Parlour v The National Association of Sc... (Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Other) [2022] NIFET 00590_20FET (18 May 2022)
  • McGurk v The Council Members for the ti... (Unfair Dismissal Discrimination - Religious Belief/ Political opinion Unauthorised Deduction of Wages) [2022] NIFET 00615_20FET (16 May 2022)
  • PW v Department for Communities (PIP) (Tribunals - General) [2023] NICom 39 (07 December 2023)
  • A MCA v Department for Communities (SPC) (Commissioners - Abatement) [2022] NICom 1 (24 November 2023)
  • LFP v Department for Communities (PIP) [2023] NICom 38 (10 November 2023)
  • TP v Department for Communities (PIP) (Jurisdiction (Competent State)) [2023] NICom 23 (19 October 2023)
  • SS v Department for Communities (UC) (UNIVERSAL CREDIT : Right to reside) [2023] NICom 31 (10 October 2023)
  • TO'H v Department for Communities (PIP) (PERSONAL INDEPENDENCE PAYMENT) [2023] NICom 26 (19 September 2023)
  • AL v Department for Communities (ESA) (EMPLOYMENT AND SUPPORT ALLOWANCE) [2023] NICom 25 (19 September 2023)
  • NS v Department for Communities (ESA) [2023] NICom 29 (18 September 2023)
  • IP v Department for Communities (AA) (ATTENDANCE ALLOWANCE) [2023] NICom 27 (18 September 2023)
  • PMCK v Department for Communities (PIP) (PERSONAL INDEPENDENCE PAYMENT) [2023] NICom 24 (19 July 2023)
  • NB v Department for Communities (PIP - PERSONAL INDEPENDENCE PAYMENT) [2023] NICom 20 (10 July 2023)
  • LH v Department for Communities (PIP) (Tribunals - Findings) [2023] NICom 19 (15 June 2023)
  • AF v Department for Communities (UC) (Employed earnings) [2023] NICom 18 (22 May 2023)
  • FM v Department for Communities (PIP) (PERSONAL INDEPENDENCE PAYMENT) [2023] NICom 17 (18 May 2023)
  • BM v Department for Communities (PIP) (Personal Independence Payment) [2023] NICom 14 (28 April 2023)
  • GM v Department for Communities (PIP) (Personal Independence Payment) [2023] NICom 15 (27 April 2023)
  • RE v Department for Communities (PIP) (Not Applicable) [2023] NICom 12 (19 April 2023)
  • SMACL v Department for Communities (PIP) (Not Applicable) [2023] NICom 11 (04 April 2023)
  • AS v Department for Communities (PIP) (Not Applicable) [2023] NICom 10 (20 March 2023)
  • MH v Department for Communities (PIP) (Not Applicable) [2023] NICom 9 (13 March 2023)
  • Dougal & Ors, The Springhill Inquest into the deaths of [2024] NICoroner 11 (12 February 2024)
  • Dougal & Ors, Inquest into the Deaths Of (The Springhill Inquest - No. 6) (Re Application by Military Witnesses for Anonymity, Screening and Remote Evidence) [2024] NICoroner 9 (01 February 2024)
  • Duffy, Inquest into the Death Of (Re Listing the Inquest) [2024] NICoroner 6 (26 January 2024)
  • Coney, Inquest into the Deaths Of (Re Ruling on Whether Article 2 Applies to the Inquest) [2024] NICoroner 5 (15 January 2024)
  • Doherty & Anor, Inquest into the Deaths Of (Re Ruling on Application for Medical Excusal, Anonmymity and Screening for PW 35) [2024] NICoroner 2 (09 January 2024)
  • Doherty & Anor, Inquest into the Deaths Of (Re Ruling on Anonymity and Screening Application - PW9) [2024] NICoroner 1 (09 January 2024)
  • Inquests touching upon the deaths of Lillian Majorie Cawdery and Michael Julien Hope Cawdery [2023] NICoroner 22 (13 December 2023)
  • Ferguson, Inquest into the Death of [2023] NICoroner 20 (11 December 2023)
  • Public Prosecution Service v Boyd (Re Ruling on an Application to State a Case) [2023] NIMag 1 (30 November 2023)
  • Doherty & Anor, Inquest into the Deaths Of (Re Ruling on Anonymity and Screening Applications - PW7) [2023] NICoroner 18 (27 November 2023)
  • Kelly v Department for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs [2023] NICty 4 (16 November 2023)
  • Fleming & Anor, An Inquest into the Deaths of [2023] NICoroner 14 (17 October 2023)
  • Doherty & Anor, Inquest into the Deaths Of (Re Provision of Witness Bundles to Witnesses in Advance of Giving Evidence) [2023] NICoroner 15 (17 October 2023)
  • Shima Alamin and Northern Ireland Housing Executive [2023] NICty 2 (21 September 2023)
  • Norney, Inquest into the Death of (Re Anonymity and Screening Ruling) [2023] NICoroner 12 (06 September 2023)
  • Norney, Inquest into the Death of [2023] NICoroner 11 (30 June 2023)
  • McNally & Ors, Inquest into the Deaths of (Ruling on Medical Excusal Application) [2023] NICoroner 10 (22 June 2023)
  • GLENTORAN PREMIER CLUB IN RESPECT OF PREMISES AT THE OVAL, PARKGATE DRIVE, BELFAST, Re [2023] NICty 1 (12 June 2023)
  • McNally & Ors, Inquest into the Deaths of (Ruling on Disclosure and Privilege) [2023] NICoroner 8 (08 June 2023)
  • Doherty & Anor, Inquest into the Deaths Of (Re Open Ruling on the Claim for Public Interest Immunity) [2023] NICoroner 4 (12 May 2023)
  • LDC (Ferry Lane) GP3 Ltd v Garro & Ors (HOUSING - RENT REPAYMENT ORDER - purpose-built student accommodation - additional licensing scheme) [2024] UKUT 40 (LC) (12 February 2024)
  • Daejan Investments Ltd v Collins & Anor (LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT - PREMIUM - improvements)[2024] UKUT 26 (LC) (09 February 2024}
  • Tower Hamlets Community Housing Ltd v Leaseholders of Painter House (LANDLORD AND TENANT - VARIATION OF LEASE - computation of service charge in a lease - the construction of the 'gateway' provision of section 35(2) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1987 - exercise of discretion - whether variation sought would be reasonable or would substantially prejudice the leaseholders) [2024] UKUT 37 (LC) (09 February 2024)
  • Blackhorse Investments (Borough) Ltd v London Borough Of Southwark [2024] UKUT 33 (LC) (05 February 2024)
  • Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council v Wang (HOUSING - CIVIL PENALTY - validity of notice of intent to impose financial penalty - adequacy of statement of reasons - whether failure to give sufficient reasons invalidated penalty or was cured by other material from which reasons were apparent - section 249A, Housing Act 2004 - Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation (England) Retulations 2006) [2024] UKUT 24 (LC) (29 January 2024)
  • Brown v Ridley & Anor (LAND REGISTRATION - AVERSE PROSSESSION) [2024] UKUT 14 (LC) (23 January 2024)
  • Lloyds Banking Group PLC v Burnley Borough Council (COMPENSATION - Compulsory Purchase - property acquired subject to a mortgage - non-participation of mortgagor - property in disrepair - value less than outstanding mortgage debt - comparable transactions - section 15, Compulsory Purchase Act 1965) [2024] UKUT 20 (LC) (22 January 2024)
  • Barker v Shokar (HOUSING - RENT REPAYMENT ORDER - criteria for identifying a 'self-contained flat' - whether building was a house in multiple occuation - adequacy of reasons) [2024] UKUT 17 (LC) (17 January 2024)
  • Crisplane Ltd v Plymouth Community Homes Ltd (LANDLORD AND TENANT - SERVICE CHARGES - liability of lessee under right to buy leases to contribute to cost of repairing roof - s.139 and Sch.6, para 14, Housing Act 1985) [2024] UKUT 15 (LC) (16 January 2024)
  • Robling & Anor v Doe (PARK HOMES - PITCH FEE REVIEW - PROCEDURE) [2024] UKUT 11 (LC) (08 January 2024)
  • Rogers & Anor v Dinshaw & Ors (RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS - discharge - covenant preventing extensionof bungalow without prior approval - bungalow extended in breach of covenant - whether covenant was obsolete or secured practical benefits of substantial value or advantage - S.84(1)(a), (aa) and (c) Law of Property Act 1925) [2024] UKUT 1 (LC) (08 January 2024)
  • Gray's Inn Investments Ltd v Jolleys (LEASEHOLD ENFRANCHISEMENT - COSTS) [2024] UKUT 2 (LC) (03 January 2024)
  • Cottam & Ors v Lowe Management Ltd (HOUSING - RENT REPAYMENT ORDER - statutory definitions of "person managing" and "person in control of" an HMO) [2023] UKUT 306 (LC) (20 December 2023)
  • Park Green Investments Ltd v Teignbridge District Council (HOUSING - CIVIL PENALTY - financial penalty imposed on freeholder of building divided into three flats let on long leases) [2023] UKUT 292 (LC) (15 December 2023)
  • Fosse Urban Projects Ltd v Whyte & Ors [2023] UKUT 286 (LC) (08 December 2023)
  • Hussain v London Borough of Newham (HOUSING - BANNING ORDER - banning order offences - spent convictions - construction of sections 15 and 16 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 - section 7(3) of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974) [2023] UKUT 287 (LC) (06 December 2023)
  • Date-Bah & Anor v Radice (HOUSING - RENT REPAYMENT ORDER) [2023] UKUT 289 (LC) (04 December 2023)
  • Yarnold & Ors v Ziga & Ors (LAND REGISTRATION - RESTRICTION - contract for investment in development to be secured by legal charge) [2023] UKUT 284 (LC) (01 December 2023)
  • Brookhouse & Anor v The Environment Agency (COMPENSATION - WATER) [2023] UKUT 282 (LC) (30 November 2023)
  • Irvine v Metcalfe & Ors (HOUSING - RENT REPAYMENT ORDER - unlicensed HMO) [2023] UKUT 283 (LC) (30 November 2023)
  • Kennaugh v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 128 (GRC) (13 February 2024)
  • Ball v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 129 (GRC) (13 February 2024)
  • Howat v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 109 (GRC) (07 February 2024)
  • Elizabeth Arden (UK) Ltd v The Environment Agency [2024] UKFTT 112 (GRC) (7 February 2024)
  • Hogg v The Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 110 (GRC) (7 February 2024)
  • Allum v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 98 (GRC) (01 February 2024)
  • Orange Fisher Ltd v Pensions Regulator [2024] UKFTT 96 (GRC) (31 January 2024)
  • Nightingale v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 93 (GRC) (30 January 2024)
  • Kanter-Webber v Information Commissioner & Anor [2024] UKFTT 90 (GRC) (30 January 2024)
  • Spiers v Garstang Medical Practice [2024] UKFTT 92 (GRC) (30 January 2024)
  • Cleasby v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 89 (GRC) (30 January 2024)
  • Callister v Information Commissioner & Anor [2024] UKFTT 94 (GRC) (30 January 2024)
  • Carnell v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 88 (GRC) (30 January 2024)
  • SP v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 87 (GRC) (29 January 2024)
  • Perrys Motor Sales/Perrys Group Ltd v Information Commissioner & Anor [2024] UKFTT 62 (GRC) (26 January 2024)
  • Learmond-Criqui v Information Commissioner & Anor [2024] UKFTT 77 (GRC) (26 January 2024)
  • UA v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 76 (GRC) (25 January 2024)
  • Hands v Information Commissioner [2024] UKFTT 86 (GRC) (25 January 2024)
  • The Royal Mint Ltd v Information Commissioner & Anor [2024] UKFTT 73 (GRC) (24 January 2024)
  • Carter v Information Commissioner & Ors [2024] UKFTT 72 (GRC) (24 January 2024)
  • OKRA HOME (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o055923 (22 June 2023)
  • F fortitude, Fortitude Sports, Fortitude Fightwear (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o056523 (19 June 2023)
  • IAA, Inc. (Patent) [2023] UKIntelP o055423 (19 June 2023)
  • Tray 2 Tray by Faerch (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o056123 (16 June 2023)
  • Arctic King (figurative) (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o056223 (16 June 2023)
  • WOW COLOUR (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o055523 (14 June 2023)
  • SP NUTRACHEMICALS INC (Patent) [2023] UKIntelP o055023 (14 June 2023)
  • ARTFUL DODGER (Trade Mark: Revocation) [2023] UKIntelP o055723 (14 June 2023)
  • Mango Street Holdings Pty Ltd, Kelly Lavery and Mayer Jung (Patent) [2023] UKIntelP o052723 (13 June 2023)
  • HYPE (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o054923 (13 June 2023)
  • Axomera (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o054723 (12 June 2023)
  • SUSPICION (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o054223 (12 June 2023)
  • AIRTASKER (Trade Mark: Invalidity) [2023] UKIntelP o054323 (12 June 2023)
  • WMNS WEAR & WMN (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o053423 (9 June 2023)
  • Honbike & HONBIKE (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o053523 (9 June 2023)
  • EOS (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o054023 (9 June 2023)
  • TINY CLOUD KITCHENS (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o053723 (9 June 2023)
  • THE HOME OF OBSESSIVE DREAMERS (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o053623 (9 June 2023)
  • BeaudeLab +BeauLabde (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2023] UKIntelP o053823 (9 June 2023)
  • Eclipse Labels (Trade Mark: Invalidity) [2023] UKIntelP o053123 (8 June 2023)
  • JR2022LON002069 [2024] UKAITUR JR2022LON002069 (8 February 2024)
  • UI2022005682 & Ors [2024] UKAITUR UI2022005682 (26 January 2024)
  • UI2021000844 [2024] UKAITUR UI2021000844 (26 January 2024)
  • UI2022006327 [2024] UKAITUR UI2022006327 (26 January 2024)
  • UI2023002791 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023002791 (26 January 2024)
  • UI2023002945 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023002945 (26 January 2024)
  • UI2023004195 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023004195 (26 January 2024)
  • UI2023004755 & Ors [2024] UKAITUR UI2023004755 (26 January 2024)
  • UI2023001527 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023001527 (26 January 2024)
  • UI2023005203 & UI2023005204 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023005203 (25 January 2024)
  • UI2023005228 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023005228 (25 January 2024)
  • UI2023005163 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023005163 (25 January 2024)
  • UI2023004283 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023004283 (25 January 2024)
  • UI2023005426 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023005426 (25 January 2024)
  • UI2022006646 [2024] UKAITUR UI2022006646 (25 January 2024)
  • UI2022003842 [2024] UKAITUR UI2022003842 (25 January 2024)
  • JR2023LON000288 [2024] UKAITUR JR2023LON000288 (25 January 2024)
  • UI2021000850 [2024] UKAITUR UI2021000850 (25 January 2024)
  • UI2022006636 [2024] UKAITUR UI2022006636 (25 January 2024)
  • UI2023003019 [2024] UKAITUR UI2023003019 (25 January 2024)
  • Z3 v (1) Secretary Of State For The Home Department (2) Security Service (3) HM Prison and Probation Service (4) Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police[2023] UKIPTrib 7 (18 July 2023)
  • Abd Al-Rahim Al-Nashiri v (1) Security Service (2) Secret Intelligence Service (3) Government Communications Headquarters (4) Ministry of Defence [2023] UKIPTrib 6 (21 June 2023)
  • Al-Hawsawi v Security Service & Ors UKIPTrib 5 (26 May 2023)
  • SF & Ors v NCA [2023] UKIPTrib 3 (11 May 2023)
  • Pendlebury v Greater Manchester Police Judgment[2023] UKIPTrib 2 (5 April 2023)
  • Liberty v Security Service [2023] UKIPTrib 1 (30 January 2023)
  • KJF v Surrey Police [2022] UKIP Trib 7 (30 December 2022)
  • Damian Hill and Metropolitan Police Service & Independent Office For Police Conduct [2022] UKIP Trib 6 (30 December 2022)
  • Wilson v Police Scotland [2022] UKIPTrib 5 (14 December 2022)
  • Z3 v (1)Secretary of State for Home Department (2) Security Service (3) HM Prison and Probation Service (4) Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (5) Government Communications Headquarters [2022] UKIP Trib 4 (02 November 2022)
  • Various v (1) Security Service (2) Government Communications Headquarters [2022] UKIP Trib 3 (01 November 2022)
  • Bartram & Anor v Chief Constable of British Transport Police (Open Judgment - Ruling on Jurisdiction) [2022] UKIPTrib 2 (11 May 2022)
  • Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2022] UKIPTrib 1 (28 April 2022)
  • Liberty & Privacy International v Security Service & Secretary Of State for the Home Department [2021] UKIPTrib IPT_20_01_CH (22 February 2022)
  • Privacy International & Ors v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs & Ors [2021] UKIPTrib IPT_17_86_CH (21 October 2021)
  • Wilson v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis & Anor [2021] UKIPTrib IPT_11_167_H (30 September 2021)
  • Privacy International v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs & Ors [2021] UKIPTrib IPT_20_01_CH (27 July 2021)
  • Privacy International Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2021] UKIPTrib IPT_15_110_CH (22 July 2021)
  • Police for the Metropolis v CLS [2021] UKIPTrib IPT_20_89_CH(16 June 2021)
  • Wilson v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2021] UKIPTrib IPT_167_01_H (13 January 2021)
  • Mathur v Revenue And Customs [2024] UKUT 00038 (TCC) (INCOME TAX - taxpayer received payment from her former employer in settlement of Employment Tribunal proceedings) [2024] UKUT 38 (TCC) (12 February 2024)
  • Revenue And Customs v Ridgway (STAMP DUTY LAND TAX) [2024] UKUT 00036 (TCC) [2024] UKUT 36 (TCC) (09 February 2024)
  • Nvayo Ltd v The Financial Conduct Authority (FINANCIAL SERVICES - procedure - supervisory notices imposing requirements taking immediate effect in relation to e-money institution's new and existing business and its assets) [2024] UKUT 35 (TCC) (05 February 2024)
  • Hartleb T/A Hartleb Transport v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (EXCISE DUTIES - Reg. 13(2)(b) of the Excise Goods (Holding, Movement and Duty Point) Regulations 2010) [2024] UKUT 34 (TCC) (01 February 2024)
  • Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Hippodrome Casino Ltd (VAT - recovery of residual input tax - whether FtT erred in failing to determine whether there was a dual use of taxable supplies of entertainment and hospitality also for the non-taxable supplies of gaming in the casino) [2024] UKUT 27 (TCC) (29 January 2024)
  • Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Applicants in the Post Prudential Closure Notice Applications Group Litigation & Anor (Corporation tax - double taxation relief on foreign dividend income - portfolio holdings - procedural issues arising out of claims for relief and claims for repayment of overpaid tax following the UK's established breach of EU law) [2024] UKUT 23 (TCC) (25 January 2024)
  • Exchequer Solutions Ltd v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (PAYE & NIC - travel and subsistence expenses paid by umbrella company servicing construction industry clients - whether mutuality of obligation to constitute overarching contract of employment or whether arrangement amounted to series of individual assignments in which case travel expenses not allowable as ordinary commuting expenses) [2024] UKUT 25 (TCC) (24 January 2024)
  • Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs v The Taxpayer (INCOME TAX - Penalty under s208 Finance Act 2014 issued after issue of follower notice in relation to arrangements said to give rise to loss on 'relevant discounted securities' (Schedule 13 Finance Act 1996) - whether FTT erred in its approach to holding judicial ruling (Audley v HMRC) was 'relevant' to taxpayer's arrangements because it had regard to 'post-Ramsey analysis' facts rather than primary facts) [2024] UKUT 21 (TCC) (22 January 2024)
  • Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs v The Taxpayer (INCOME TAX - case management direction that 'preliminary preceedings in this matter shall be heard in private' - whether direction justified in order to prevent prejudice to the interests of justice) [2024] UKUT 12 (TCC) (10 January 2024)
  • United Grand Lodge of England v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Value Added Tax, Exemptions, Item 1(e) of Group 9 of Schedule 9 Value Added Tax Act 1994, Article 132(1)(1) Council Directive 2006/112/EC - whether FTT failed to give reasons for rejecting part of Appellant's case - whether aim to provide Relief to Freemasons and their dependents is philanthropic) [2023] UKUT 307 (TCC) (19 December 2023)
  • Ammanford Recycling Ld v Revenue And Customs (PROCEDURE - FTT correct to hold HMRC not required to disclose information) [2023] UKUT 302 (TCC) (14 December 2023)
  • Higgs & Ors v Revenue And Customs (Procedure - preliminary issue - marketed tax avoidance scheme) [2023] UKUT 296 (TCC) (13 December 2023)
  • Bollinway Properties Ltd v Revenue And Customs (VAT - REPAYMENT SUPPLEMENT - Purchase of properties) [2023] UKUT 295 (TCC) (12 December 2023)
  • Parnham & Anor v Revenue And Customs (EXCISE DUTIES - assessment on road hauliers for joint and several liability in relation to excise duty) [2023] UKUT 285 (TCC) (28 November 2023)
  • Revenue And Customs v International Plywood (Importers) Ltd (Customs Duty - Commodity Codes - classification - wooden panels) [2023] UKUT 278 (TCC) (17 November 2023)
  • Exclusive Promotions Ltd v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs [2023] UKUT 269 (TCC) (09 November 2023)
  • Seiler & Anor V The Financial Conduct Authority [2023] UKUT 270 (TCC) (09 November 2023)
  • Octagon Green Solutions Ltd v Revenue And Customs (LATE APPEAL - VAT and Landfill Tax assessments) [2023] UKUT 268 (TCC) (06 November 2023)
  • Gunfleet Sands Ltd & Ors v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (CORPORATION TAX - s11 Capital Allowances Act 2001 - Schedule 18 Finance Act 1998) [2023] UKUT 260 (TCC) (26 October 2023)
  • Fox-Bryant & Anor v The Financial Conduct Authority [2023] UKUT 259 (TCC) (25 October 2023)
  • Jersey Choice Ltd v HM Treasury [2024] UKSC 5 (14 February 2024)
  • Hilland, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) (Rev1) [2024] UKSC 4 (07 February 2024)
  • Potanina v Potanin [2024] UKSC 3 (31 January 2024)
  • Herculito Maritime Ltd & Ors v Gunvor International BV & Ors [2024] UKSC 2 (17 January 2024)
  • Paul & Anor v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2024] UKSC 1 (11 January 2024)
  • Zubaydah v Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and others [2023] UKSC 50 (20 December 2023)
  • Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [2023] UKSC 49 (20 December 2023)
  • HXA v Surrey County Council [2023] UKSC 52 (20 December 2023)
  • Byers & Ors v Saudi National Bank (Rev1) [2023] UKSC 51 (20 December 2023)
  • TUI UK Ltd v Griffiths [2023] UKSC 48 (29 November 2023)
  • Wolverhampton City Council & Ors v London Gypsies and Travellers & Ors [2023] UKSC 47 (29 November 2023)
  • Afzal, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 46 (28 November 2023)
  • Imam, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Croydon [2023] UKSC 45 (28 November 2023)
  • Independent Workers Union of Great Britain v Central Arbitration Committee & Anor [2023] UKSC 43 (21 November 2023)
  • Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Fisher & Anor [2023] UKSC 44 (21 November 2023)
  • Canada Square Operations Ltd v Potter [2023] UKSC 41 (15 November 2023)
  • AAA (Syria) & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 42 (15 November 2023)
  • Popoviciu v Curtea De Apel Bucharest (Romania) (Rev1) [2023] UKSC 39 (8 November 2023)
  • Skatteforvaltningen (the Danish Customs and Tax Administration) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2023] UKSC 40 (8 November 2023)
  • Palmer, R (on the application of) v Northern Derbyshire Magistrates' Court & Anor [2023] UKSC 38 (01 November 2023)
  • Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago v Maharaj (Trinidad and Tobago) [2024] UKPC 1 (25 January 2024)
  • Chang v The Hospital Administrator & Ors (Trinidad and Tobago) [2023] UKPC 44 (12 December 2023)
  • Chitolie & Anor v Saint Lucia National Housing Corporation [2023] UKPC 43 (05 December 2023)
  • Arjoon & Ors v Daniel (Receiver) (Trinidad and Tobago) [2023] UKPC 42 (04 December 2023)
  • Henry & Anor v Attorney General of St Lucia (Saint Lucia) [2023] UKPC 41 (27 November 2023)
  • Primeo Fund v Bank of Bermuda (Cayman) Ltd & Anor (Cayman Islands) [2023] UKPC 40 (15 November 2023)
  • Renraw Investments Ltd & Ors v Real Time Systems Ltd (Trinidad & Tobago) [2023] UKPC 39 (13 November 2023)
  • Lafresiere v New Mauritius Hotels Ltd (Mauritius) [2023] UKPC 38 (26 October 2023)
  • Dayal v Jugnauth & Ors [2023] UKPC 37 (16 October 2023)
  • Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago v Vijay Maharaj Substituted on behalf of the Estate of Satnarayan Maharaj for Satnarayan Maharaj & Anor (Trinidad and Tobago) [2023] UKPC 36 (12 October 2023)
  • Stanford Asset Holdings Ltd & Anor v AfrAsia Bank Ltd (Mauritius) [2023] UKPC 35 (10 October 2023)
  • Bertrand & Ors v Elias (Trinidad and Tobago) [2023] UKPC 34 (26 September 2023)
  • FamilyMart China Holding Co Ltd v Ting Chuan (Cayman Islands) Holding Corporation (Cayman Islands) [2023] UKPC 33 (20 September 2023)
  • Watson v The King (Bahamas) [2023] UKPC 32 (05 September 2023)
  • Garcia v Arima Door Centre Holding Company Ltd (Trinidad and Tobago) [2023] UKPC 31 (01 August 2023)
  • Finzi v Jamaican Redevelopment Foundation Inc & Ors (Jamaica) [2023] UKPC 29 (27 July 2023)
  • Roopnarine v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago (Trinidad and Tobago) [2023] UKPC 30 (27 July 2023)
  • Moss v The King (Bahamas) [2023] UKPC 28 (25 July 2023)
  • The Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue v Boland & Ors (Trinidad and Tobago) [2023] UKPC 27 (18 July 2023)
  • Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago v Trinsalvage Enterprises Ltd (Trinidad & Tobago) [2023] UKPC 26 (18 July 2023)
  • Z v Commerzbank AG & Ors (Anonymity; holiday pay; costs in employment tribunal; costs in the appeal) [2024] EAT 11 (12 February 2024)
  • Lawrynowicz v Bidvest Noonan (UK) Ltd (Unfair Dismissal) [2024] EAT 13 (09 February 2024)
  • Chevalier-Firescu v HSBC Bank PLC (PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE) [2024] EAT 6 (09 February 2024)
  • Logo v Payone GmbH & Ors (RACE DISCRIMINATION) [2024] EAT 9 (08 February 2024)
  • Fasano v Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC & Anor (PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - AGE DISCRIMINATION) [2024] EAT 7 (31 January 2024)
  • Sean Pong Tyres Ltd v Moore (TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE) [2024] EAT 1 (29 January 2024)
  • Jones v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (RACE DISCRIMINATION) [2024] EAT 2 (23 January 2024)
  • Glasson v The Insolvency Service (DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION) [2024] EAT 5 (23 January 2024)
  • Sullivan v Isle of Wight Council (JURISDICTION - EMPLOYEE, WORKER OR SELF-EMPLOYED) [2024] EAT 3 (22 January 2024)
  • Lancashire and South Cumbria NHS Foundation Trust v Moon (JURISDICTION - EMPLOYEE, WORKER OR SELF-EMPLOYED) [2024] EAT 4 (22 January 2024)
  • Barnard v Hampshire and Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Authority (EQUAL PAY) [2024] EAT 12 (03 January 2024)
  • Blanc de Provence Ltd v Ha (HARASSMENT) [2023] EAT 160 (21 December 2023)
  • Ion v CITU Manufacturing Ltd & Anor (PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, RACE DISCRIMINATION, WHISTLEBLOWING) [2023] EAT 151 (14 December 2023)
  • Rahim v The Big Word & Anor (JURISDICTIONAL, Practice and procedure) [2023] EAT 171 (12 December 2023)
  • The Kingdom Of Spain v Lorenzo (JURISDICTION, RACE DISCRIMINATION) [2023] EAT 153 (12 December 2023)
  • Hassane v GlaxoSmithKline Services Unlimited (Practice and Procedure - Whether ET had Addressed the Claimant's Case - Adequacy of Reasons) [2023] EAT 150 (07 December 2023)
  • SPI Spirits (UK) Ltd & Anor v Zabelin (WHISTLEBLOWING) [2023] EAT 147 (06 December 2023)
  • Edge Hill University v Glasby (Practice and Procedure) [2023] EAT 162 (06 December 2023)
  • Carryl v Governing Body of Manford Primary School (PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE) [2023] EAT 167 (06 December 2023)
  • Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia (Cultural Bureau) v Alhayali (Jurisdictional Points - State Immunity) [2023] EAT 149 (05 December 2023)
  • Mr L Maxwell v Harco Transport Solutions Ltd (Scotland : Unlawful Deduction from Wages) [2024] UKET 4104609/2023 (31 January 2024)
  • Mr C Turnbull v Haplo (Part of Cayuse) (Scotland : Breach of Contract) [2024] UKET 4106959/2023 (26 January 2024)
  • Mr R Dychalski v TLC Car Care Ltd (Scotland : Working Time Regulations) [2024] UKET 4106957/2023 (25 January 2024)
  • Mr L Breitbergs v Sterling Personnel (England and Wales : Breach of Contract) [2024] UKET 2601765/2023 (25 January 2024)
  • Ms H Bell v Kenneth Martin Photography Ltd (Scotland : Breach of Contract) [2024] UKET 4101936/2023 (25 January 2024)
  • Mr B Kareem v NCR Financial Solutions Group Ltd (Scotland : Race Discrimination) [2024] UKET 8000268/2023 (23 January 2024)
  • J Phoenix v The Open University and others (England and Wales : Breach of Contract) [2024] UKET 3322700/2021 (22 January 2024)
  • Mr A Mishra v Ivorysands Hospitality Ltd (England and Wales : Unfair Dismissal) [2024] UKET 1601705/2023 (22 January 2024)
  • Mr G Scott v The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (England and Wales : Breach of Contract) [2024] UKET 1602198/2023 (22 January 2024)
  • Mr G Clissett v U9 Group Ltd (England and Wales : Breach of Contract) [2024] UKET 1602958/2023 (22 January 2024)
  • Mr K Hindmarch v North East Ambulance NHS Foundation Trust (England and Wales : Disability Discrimination) [2024] UKET 2500323/2022 (22 January 2024)
  • Mr C Dorogoncean v Mr S Doca and Termopane Windows Ltd (England and Wales : Unlawful Deduction from Wages) [2024] UKET 3305565/2023 (22 January 2024)
  • Mr T J Zajda v Azrovefiz Ltd (England and Wales : Unlawful Deduction from Wages) [2024] UKET 1601469/2023 (22 January 2024)
  • Ms K Evans v Bolton NHS Foundation Trust (England and Wales : Unfair Dismissal) [2024] UKET 2404449/2023 (21 January 2024)
  • Mr S Bux v EE Ltd (England and Wales : Unfair Dismissal) [2024] UKET 2403658/2023 (20 January 2024)
  • Mr J Perrett v Betfred Ltd (England and Wales : Unfair Dismissal) [2024] UKET 2411379/2023 (19 January 2024)
  • Mr J C Betancourt v UK Research and Innovation (England and Wales : Breach of Contract) [2024] UKET 3304228/2023 (19 January 2024)
  • Mr C Mackay v Pyramid Display Materials Ltd (England and Wales : Disability Discrimination) [2024] UKET 2414360/2021 (19 January 2024)
  • C Buxton-Wade v Norfolk Countryside Care Ltd and I Gibb (England and Wales : Public Interest Disclosure) [2024] UKET 3302775/2023 (19 January 2024)
  • Miss C Capapinha v G M Martins (England and Wales : Unfair Dismissal) [2024] UKET 3205468/2022 (19 January 2024)
  • C9 (Deprivation : Substantive) [2024] UKSIAC SC_173_2020_ (2 February 2024)
  • H5_and_Others (Exclusion : Substantive : Withdrawn) [2024] UKSIAC SC_204_2023 (29 January 2024)
  • F4 (Deprivation : Substantive : Dismissed) [2024] UKSIAC SC_193_2022 (24 January 2024)
  • S3 (Deprivation : Substantive : Allowed) [2023] UKSIAC SC_151_2018 (20 December 2023)
  • D8 ( Exclusion : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 1_SC_179_2020 (19 October 2023)
  • D7 (Exclusion : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 3_SC_178_2020 (13 October 2023)
  • D5_and_D6 ( Deprivation : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 2_SC_176_2020 (13 October 2023)
  • Pawel_Golaszewski (Deportation : Strike Out) [2023] UKSIAC 4_SC_187_2021 (12 October 2023)
  • W2 (Deprivation : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 1_SC_131_2016 (11 August 2023)
  • K3 (Deprivation : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 1_SC_143_2017 (30 June 2023)
  • C17_and_C18 (Extension of Time : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 1_SC_199_2022 (09 June 2023)
  • E5 (Deprivation : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 1_SC_184_2021 (3 March 2023)
  • C13 (Preliminary Issues : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 2_SC_197_2022 (3 March 2023)
  • Shamima Begum (Deprivation : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 1_SC_163_2019 (22 February 2023)
  • Mustafa Ates (MUA) (Naturalisation : Substantive) [2023] UKSIAC 2_SN_96_2021 (17 January 2023)
  • D9 (Exclusion : Substantive) [2022] UKSIAC 1_SC_180_2021 (15 November 2022)
  • B4 (Deprivation Of Citizenship : Substantive) [2022] UKSIAC 2_SC_159_2018 (1 November 2022)
  • C12 (Extension of Time : Substantive) [2022] UKSIAC 3_N_A (16 September 2022)
  • D8 (Exclusion : Bail Application) [2022] UKSIAC SC_179_2020 (15 June 2022)
  • U3 v The Secretary Of State for the Home Department [2022] UKSIAC SC_153_2018 (04 March 2022)
  • Mark McLaren Class Representative Ltd v MOL (Europe Africa) Ltd & Ors [2024] CAT 10 (07 February 2024)
  • Up and Running (UK) Ltd v Deckers UK Ltd [2024] CAT 9 (06 February 2024)
  • Julie Hunter v Amazon.com, Inc. and others [2024] CAT 8 (05 February 2024)
  • Airwave Solutions Limited & Others v Competition and Markets Authority [2024] CAT 7 (30 January 2024)
  • Mr Justin Gutmann v Apple Inc., Apple Distribution International Limited, and Apple Retail UK Limited [2024] CAT 6 (30 January 2024)
  • Kent v Apple Inc. & Anor [2024] CAT 5 (19 January 2024)
  • Commercial and Interregional Card Claims I Ltd ("CICC I") v Mastercard Incorporated & Others [2024] CAT 3 (17 January 2024)
  • Walter Hugh Merricks CBE v Mastercard Incorporated and Others [2024] CAT 4 (16 January 2024)
  • Arla Foods AMBA and Others v Stellantis N.V. (formerly Fiat Chrysler Automobiles N.V.) and Another [2024] CAT 2 (09 January 2024)
  • Alex Neill Class Representative Ltd v Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd; Sony Interactive Entertainment Network Europe Ltd; and Sony Interactive Entertainment UK Ltd [2024] CAT 1 (05 January 2024)
  • OT Computers Ltd (in liquidation) v Micron Europe Ltd [2023] CAT 78 (29 December 2023)
  • OT Computers Ltd (in liquidation) v Micron Europe Ltd [2023] CAT 77 (29 December 2023)
  • Airwave Solutions Ltd & Others v Competition and Markets Authority [2023] CAT 76 (22 December 2023)
  • Mark McLaren Class Representative Ltd v MOL (Europe Africa) Ltd and Others [2023] CAT 62 (07 December 2023)
  • Mark McLaren Class Representative Ltd v MOL (Europe Africa) Ltd and Others [2023] CAT 75 (06 December 2023)
  • Gutmann v Apple Inc., Apple Distribution International Ltd, and Apple Retail UK Ltd [2023] CAT 74 (27 November 2023)
  • Alex Neill Class Representative Ltd v Sony Interactive Entertainment Europe Ltd; Sony Interactive Entertainment Network Europe Ltd; and Sony Interactive Entertainment UK Ltd [2023] CAT 73 (21 November 2023)
  • Coll v Alphabet Inc. & Ors [2023] CAT 72 (16 November 2023)
  • Sky UK Ltd v Office of Communications [2023] CAT 70 (15 November 2023)
  • Mark McLaren Class Representative Ltd v MOL (Europe Africa) Ltd & Ors [2023] CAT 71 (14 November 2023)
  • Gam v The Secretary of State for Defence [2024] UKUT 10 (AAC) (14 February 2024)
  • Central Haulage Ltd& Ors (Transport) [2024] UKUT 22 (AAC) (23 January 2024)
  • CW v Disclosure and Barring Service (Safeguarding vulnerable groups - Children's barred list) [2024] UKUT 19 (AAC) (16 January 2024)
  • The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority v First-tier Tribunal (CIC) and Stone (Criminal injuries compensation) [2024] UKUT 3 (AAC) (2 January 2024)
  • A Multi Academy Trust v RR (Disability discrimination in schools) [2024] UKUT 9 (AAC) (29 December 2023)
  • Nugent International Ltd v Presiding Officer (Transport - Appeals - Impounding) [2024] UKUT 8 (AAC) (18 December 2023)
  • WK v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and AK (CSM) (Child support - child, Child support - other, Revisions, supersessions and reviews - date of effect of decision) [2024] UKUT 7 (AAC) (15 December 2023)
  • <title>Forstater v The Information Commissioner & Ors (Information rights - Freedom of information - right of access) [2023] UKUT 303 (AAC) (14 December 2023)
  • <title>LW v Proprietor of Broughton Hall Catholic High School (Disability discrimination in schools, Tribunal procedure and practice) [2023] UKUT 301 (AAC) (11 December 2023)
  • FL v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (UC) (Human rights law, Universal Credit) [2024] UKUT 6 (AAC) (11 December 2023)
  • Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v NS (Claims and payments - required information, Employment and support allowance - contributory ESA, Recovery of overpayments - failure to disclose) [2024] UKUT 5 (AAC) (7 December 2023)
  • CW v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP) (Personal independence payment - daily living activities - Activity 10: making budgeting decisions) [2023] UKUT 297 (AAC) (5 December 2023)
  • GS v Secretary of State for Work & Pensions (Tribunal procedure and practice - statements of reasons) [2024] UKUT 4 (AAC) (4 December 2023)
  • PR v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Human rights law - article 14 (non-discrimination), Universal Credit - Limited Capability for work) [2023] UKUT 290 (AAC) (29 November 2023)
  • Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v PL (UC) (Universal Credit) [2023] UKUT 288 (AAC) (22 November 2023)
  • LC and RC v Hampshire County Council (Special educational needs) [2023] UKUT 281 (AAC) (17 November 2023)
  • MM v Disclosure and Barring Service: (UC) (Safeguarding vulnerable groups - Children's barred list) [2023] UKUT 275 (AAC) (13 November 2023)
  • Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v SV (Revisions, supersessions and reviews - mistake as to material fact) [2023] UKUT 279 (AAC) (11 November 2023)
  • The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v GK (ESA) (Appeal) [2023] UKUT 273 (AAC) (09 November 2023)
  • Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v AH (UC) (Claims and payments - appointment to act) [2023] UKUT 274 (AAC) (09 November 2023)
  • Secretary of State for the Home Department v Maleci (Non-admission of late evidence) Albania [2024] UKUT 28 (IAC) (29 January 2024)
  • Kolicaj (Deprivation: procedure and discretion) Albania [2023] UKUT 294 (IAC)) (13 November 2023)
  • Dani (non-removal human rights submissions) Albania [2023] UKUT 293 (IAC) (02 November 2023)
  • Allaraj (EEA EFMs; admission; IO's stamps) Albania [2023] UKUT 277 (IAC) (04 October 2023)
  • Ahmed (historical injustice explained) Bangladesh [2023] UKUT 165 (IAC) (03 July 2023)
  • The Secretary of State for the Home Department v TC [2023] UKUT 164 (IAC) (14 June 2023)
  • Lata (FtT: principal controversial issues) India [2023] UKUT 163 (IAC) (13 June 2023)
  • Osunneye (Zambrano, transitional appeal rights) Nigeria [2023] UKUT 162 (IAC) (30 May 2023)
  • Caguitla v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Philippines) [2023] UKUT 116 (IAC) (27 April 2023)
  • Secretary of State for the Home Department v MS (judicial interventions; complaints; safety concerns) Bangladesh [2023] UKUT 114 (IAC) (25 April 2023)
  • Rexhaj (dependent parents, assumed dependency) Albania [2023] UKUT 161 (IAC) (24 April 2023)
  • Sonkor (Zambrano and non-EUSS leave) Ghana [2023] UKUT 276 (IAC) (20 April 2023)
  • Chimi v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (deprivation appeals; scope and evidence) Cameroon [2023] UKUT 115 (IAC) (19 April 2023)
  • PO (DRC) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (DRC - Post 2018 elections) DRC CG [2023] UKUT 117 (IAC) (18 April 2023)
  • YSA Somalia (Committal for contempt by media) [2023] UKUT 75 (IAC) (14 February 2023)
  • Siddiqa (other family members, EU exit) Bangladesh [2023] UKUT 47 (IAC) (10 February 2023)
  • Begum (Remaking or remittal) Bangladesh [2023] UKUT 46 (IAC) (7 February 2023)
  • SSGA (Disposal without considering merits, R.25) Iraq [2023] UKUT 12 (IAC) (15 December 2022)
  • YSA (Anonymity of Barristers) Somalia [2023] UKUT 74 (IAC) (9 December 2022)
  • MRS and FS, R (on the application of) v Entry Clearance Officer (Biometrics, Entry Clearance, Article 8) [2023] UKUT 85 (IAC) (20 June 2022)
  • Pinnacle Brit Care Ltd v Care Quality Commission [2024] UKFTT 95 (HESC) (30 January 2024)
  • Homecare Comforts Limited v Care Quality Commission [2024] UKFTT 74 (HESC) (26 January 2024)
  • AP Care Homes Ltd (Moss Farm children's home) v Ofsted [2024] UKFTT 43 (HESC) (17 January 2024)
  • Berrystead Nursing and Residential Home Ltd v Care Quality Commission [2023] UKFTT 1085 (HESC) (28 December 2023)
  • RD v Ofsted [2023] UKFTT 1072 (HESC) (22 December 2023)
  • UK International Nursing Agency Ltd v Care Quality Commission [2023] UKFTT 1066 (HESC) (21 December 2023)
  • Ramdany (Holly Grange Residential Home) v Care Quality Commission [2023] UKFTT 1050 (HESC) (19 December 2023)
  • Crosskey (Pearson Park Care Home) v Care Quality Commission [2023] UKFTT 965 (HESC) (05 December 2023)
  • Godswill Onyinye Uzzi-Daniel & Sarah Ime Olaedo Uzzi-Daniel v Ofsted [2023] UKFTT 981 (HESC) (21 November 2023)
  • Little Bloomers Nursery Ltd v Ofsted [2023] UKFTT 980 (HESC) (20 November 2023)
  • Rauth v Ofsted [2023] UKFTT 958 (HESC) (10 November 2023)
  • iCare Solutions (Wakefield) Limited v Care Quality Commission [2023] UKFTT 835 (HESC) (11 October 2023)
  • Actus Healthcare Limited v Care Quality Commission [2023] UKFTT 832 (HESC) (11 October 2023)
  • R & K Care Services Limited v Care Quality Commission NCN: [2023] UKFTT 732 (HESC) (11 September 2023)
  • RCH Limited v Care Quality Commission Neutral Citation Number: [2023] UKFTT 731 (HESC) (11 September 2023)
  • Brythan House Limited (Clovelly House Children's Home) v Ofsted Neutral Citation number: [2023] UKFTT 730 (HESC) (07 September 2023)
  • De-Lighthouse Homes Limited v Care Quality Commission [2023] UKFTT 605 (HESC) (12 July 2023)
  • Restore Care Services v Care Quality Commission [2023] UKFTT 591 (HESC) (05 July 2023)
  • Surbiton Home Care Management Limited v Care Quality Commission [2023] UKFTT 577 (HESC) (04 July 2023)
  • Social Care Wales v O'Brien [2023] UKFTT 460 (HESC) (01 June 2023)
  • H RIPLEY & CO LTD v Revenue & Customs (PROCEDURE : Other) [2024] UKFTT 125 (TC) (07 February 2024)
  • GUERLAIN-DESAI v Revenue & Customs (PROCEDURE - Relief from sanctions - Application for an extension of time to file Statement of Case by HMRC - Martland applied) [2024] UKFTT 117 (TC) (07 February 2024)
  • REVIVE CORPORATION LTD v Revenue & Customs (VAT - missing trader fraud) [2024] UKFTT 127 (TC) (06 February 2024)
  • HOLLAND v Revenue & Customs (PROCEDURE : Other) [2024] UKFTT 123 (TC) (06 February 2024)
  • LAURENCE SUPPLY CO (LEATHER GOODS) LTD v Revenue & Customs (CUSTOMS DUTY - tariff classification - quantum of the C18 - handbags and purses) [2024] UKFTT 124 (TC) (06 February 2024)
  • BAKER v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX - Follower Notice - Penalty) [2024] UKFTT 126 (TC) (06 February 2024)
  • Passion Incorporated Ltd v Revenue And Customs (VAT - whether input tax disallowance) [2024] UKFTT 122 (TC) (5 February 2024)
  • NBC (ADMINISTRATION SERVICES) LTD v Revenue & Customs (PENSION SCHEMES - conditions and procedure for deregistration) [2024] UKFTT 120 (TC) (02 February 2024)
  • BURCHETT v Revenue & Customs (HIGH INCOME CHILD BENEFIT CHARGE - discovery assessments and non-deliberate penalties) [2024] UKFTT 121 (TC) (02 February 2024)
  • DUELFUEL NUTRITION LTD v Revenue & Customs (Sports nutrition products) [2024] UKFTT 104 (TC) (02 February 2024)
  • GRIMMER v Revenue & Customs (HIGH INCOME CHILD BENEFIT CHARGE - discovery assessments and non-deliberate penalties - whether discovery assessments valid and in time) [2024] UKFTT 119 (TC) (02 February 2024)
  • HAYES v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX - application for closure notice) [2024] UKFTT 118 (TC) (01 February 2024)
  • SMITH v Revenue & Customs (LATE APPEAL - STAMP DUTY LAND TAX - Appellant had claimed multiple dwellings relief from SDLT) [2024] UKFTT 101 (TC) (26 January 2024)
  • BYRNE & Anor (t/a EVA) v Revenue & Customs (VAT - Appeal against best of judgment assessment) [2024] UKFTT 103 (TC) (26 January 2024)
  • NEWFIELD v Revenue & Customs (CAPITAL GAINS TAX - disposal of a property which had been beneficially owned by the Appellant's trustee in bankruptcy for some part of the period between the Appellant's initial acquisition and completion of the disposal of the property) [2024] UKFTT 116 (TC) (26 January 2024)
  • BARON v Revenue & Customs (HICBC - discovery assessments - penalties for failure to notify - carelessness - reasonable excuse) [2024] UKFTT 102 (TC) (26 January 2024)
  • THE APP ACCOUNTING GROUP LTD v Revenue & Customs (PROCEDURE - application to be joined as a party - appeals against tax liabilities) [2024] UKFTT 100 (TC) (25 January 2024)
  • METATRON D.O.O. v Revenue & Customs (PROCEDURE - strike out application - whether there is a right of appeal against a refusal of an overseas refund) [2024] UKFTT 115 (TC) (25 January 2024)
  • Mahmood v Revenue And Customs (CAPITAL GAINS TAX - whether transaction rescinded on the basis of common mistake so that no disposal had taken place - validity of closure notice) [2024] UKFTT 114 (TC) (25 January 2024)
  • The Boston Consulting Group UK LLP & Ors v Revenue And Customs (LLP interests - payments made on their disposal taxed as income or capital) [2024] UKFTT 84 (TC) (23 January 2024)
  • 4 and 6, 12 Lexham Gardens, London, W8 5JE ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AW_LSC_2022_0196 (15 March 2023)
  • Harley House, 28/32 Marylebone Road, London, NW1 4PR ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00BK_LDC_2022_0253 (14 March 2023)
  • Flat 3, 235 Holmesdale Road, London, SE25 6PR - ((Leasehold) enfranchisement and extension - Flats - lease extension) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AH_OLR_2023_0067 (14 March 2023)
  • The Chart House, Burrells Wharf Square, London E14 3TN The Wheel House, Burrells Wharf Square, London E14 3TA ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00BG_LDC_2022_0209 (14 March 2023)
  • 193 Munster Road London SW6 6BY ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AN_LDC_2022_0250 (14 March 2023)
  • 1-52 Willow Court Willow Road Wallington SM6 0PF ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00BF_LDC_2023_0012 (14 March 2023)
  • 54 Belvedere Row Apartments Fountain Park Way London W12 7JF ((Housing) Act 2004 and Housing and Planning Act 2016 - Rent repayment orders) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AN_HMF_2022_0001 (13 March 2023)
  • Flat 2, 15 Fairholme Road, Croydon, Surrey, CR0 3PG ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AH_LSC_2022_0248 (12 March 2023)
  • 46, Auriol Road, W14 0SR ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Appointment of manager) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AN_LVM_2022_0021 (9 March 2023)
  • The Water Gardens, Burwood Place, London, W2 2BD ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00BK_LDC_2022_0232 (7 March 2023)
  • Flat 3, 144 Upper Wickham Lane, Welling, Kent DA16 3DP ((Housing) Act 2004 and Housing and Planning Act 2016 - Prohibition orders) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AD_HPO_2022_0005 (7 March 2023)
  • 121-127 Saunders Ness Road, London, E14 3EB ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00BG_LDC_2022_0240 (6 March 2023)
  • Flat 208 Trelawney Estate, Paragon Road, London E9 6PH ((Housing) Act 2004 and Housing and Planning Act 2016 - Rent repayment orders) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AM_HMB_2020_0005 (6 March 2023)
  • 77 Comeragh Road, London W14 9HS ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AN_LDC_2022_0243 (6 March 2023)
  • 20 Marlborough House, 37 Park Lodge Avenue, West Drayton, Middlesex, UB7 9FJ ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AS_LSC_2022_0070 (5 March 2023)
  • 29 Charley Avenue, Stanmore, Middx HA7 3RA ((Housing) Act 2004 and Housing and Planning Act 2016 - Rent repayment orders) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AQ_HMF_2022_0213 (3 March 2023)
  • 1 Auriol Mansions, Edith Road, London W14 0ST ((Housing) Act 2004 and Housing and Planning Act 2016 - Rent repayment orders) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AN_HMF_2022_0143 (2 March 2023)
  • Barons Keep, Gliddon Road, London W14 9AT ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00AN_LDC_2022_0229 (28 February 2023)
  • 28 Boyne Park, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, TN4 8ET ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT CHI_29UQ_LDC_2023_0002 (27 February 2023)
  • Flat 17 Claremont Lodge, 15 The Downs, London, SW20 8UA ((Leasehold) disputes (management) - Service charges) [2023] UKFTT LON_00BA_LSC_2022_0317 (27 February 2023)
  • Care Quality Commission (Health) [2024] UKICO 271803 (2 February 2024)
  • London Borough of Haringey (Local government) [2024] UKICO 255024 (1 February 2024)
  • London Borough of Harrow (Local government) [2024] UKICO 262995 (1 February 2024)
  • Withernsea Town Council (Local government) [2024] UKICO 272662 (1 February 2024)
  • Shropshire Council (Local government) [2024] UKICO 254892 (1 February 2024)
  • Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (Health) [2024] UKICO 259329 (1 February 2024)
  • Cabinet Office (Central government) [2024] UKICO 168141 (1 February 2024)
  • Westminster City Council (Local government) [2024] UKICO 259944 (1 February 2024)
  • Commissioner of the City of London Police (Police and criminal justice) [2024] UKICO 275834 (1 February 2024)
  • The Governing Body of The Woodlands Federation (Other) [2024] UKICO 278503 (1 February 2024)
  • Chief Constable of Lancashire Constabulary (Police and criminal justice) [2024] UKICO 261356 (31 January 2024)
  • Chief Constable of Cleveland Police (Police and criminal justice) [2024] UKICO 256405 (31 January 2024)
  • Central Bedfordshire Council (Local government) [2024] UKICO 264181 (31 January 2024)
  • Thames Valley Police (Police and criminal justice) [2024] UKICO 274385 (31 January 2024)
  • Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police (Police and criminal justice) [2024] UKICO 273412 (31 January 2024)
  • House of Commons (Central government) [2024] UKICO 252638 (31 January 2024)
  • University of Sheffield (Education) [2024] UKICO 253319 (31 January 2024)
  • Chief Constable of Cumbria Constabulary (Police and criminal justice) [2024] UKICO 271341 (31 January 2024)
  • Department for Work and Pensions (Central government) [2024] UKICO 253669 (31 January 2024)
  • Central Bedfordshire Council (Local government) [2024] UKICO 250620 (31 January 2024)
  • Alan Harte v The Superior Court Rules Committee, The Minister for Justice, Ireland and The Attorney General (Approved) [2024] IESC 2 (09 February 2024)
  • John O'Meara & Ors v The Minister for Social Protection, Ireland and The Attorney General (Approved) [2024] IESC 1 (22 January 2024)
  • Killegland Estates Ltd v Meath County Council (Approved) [2023] IESC 39 (21 December 2023)
  • McGarrell Reilly Homes Ltd & Anor v Meath County Council (Approved) [2023] IESC 40 (21 December 2023)
  • Christopher McGee v Governor of Portlaoise Prison, The Minister for Justice & Equality and Ireland and the Attorney General (Approved) [2023] IESC 41 (18 December 2023)
  • Director of Public Prosecutions v R.K (Approved) [2023] IESC 36 (14 December 2023)
  • DPP v B.K (Approved) [2023] IESC 38 (14 December 2023)
  • Minister for Justice and Equality v Sergeis Radionovs (Approved) [2023] IESC 37 (14 December 2023)
  • In the Matter of Michael Prior (seeking to be a Notary Public) and In the Matter of the courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act, 1961 (Approved) [2023] IESC 35 (13 December 2023)
  • IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 26 OF THE CONSTITUTION AND IN THE MATTER OF THE JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION BILL 2022 (Approved) [2023] IESC 34 (08 December 2023)
  • Promontoria Oyster DAC (the Objecting Creditor) v Fergus O'Connor (the Debtor) (Approved) [2023] IESC 31 (30 November 2023)
  • O' Flynn v O' Driscoll & Ors (Approved) [2023] IESC 32 (30 November 2023)
  • Smith v Cunningham (Approved) [2023] IESC 33 (30 November 2023)
  • Brendan Kirwan v John O'Leary, Bridget O'Leary, Seamus Turner, Peter Redmond, Cormac Mullen, Catherine O' Connor, Sean Nolan, Geraldine O'Loughlin, Wendy Smith and Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (Approved) [2023] IESC 27 (29 November 2023)
  • John Colm Murphy-V- The Law Society of Ireland (Approved) [2023] IESC 28 (29 November 2023)
  • Mary Munnelly v Margaret Hassett, Timothy Cremin and City Learning Ltd (Approved) [2023] IESC 29 (29 November 2023)
  • Cambervale LTD v Westside Shopping Centre LTD (Approved) [2024] IEHC 61 (13 February 2024)
  • An Taisce The National Trust for Ireland v Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board & Ors (Approved) [2024] IEHC 60 (13 February 2024)
  • Ballyboden Tidy Towns Group v An Bord Pleanala & Ors (Approved) [2024] IEHC 66 (13 February 2024)
  • McDonald v Conroy & Ors (Approved) [2024] IEHC 69 (12 February 2024)
  • T.U. v International Protection Appeals Tribunal & Anor (Approved) [2024] IEHC 73 (12 February 2024)
  • ESB v Sharkey (Approved) [2024] IEHC 65 (09 February 2024)
  • Beatty v Beatty (Approved) [2024] IEHC 71 (09 February 2024)
  • P v C (Approved) [2024] IEHC 68 (08 February 2024)
  • J. O'N & Anor v N.B. (Approved) [2024] IEHC 72 (08 February 2024)
  • Houston v Reynolds & Ors (Approved) [2024] IEHC 64 (07 February 2024)
  • In the Matter of Michael Grimes (Approved) [2024] IEHC 53 (07 February 2024)
  • Fennell v Reilly & Anor (Approved) [2024] IEHC 56 (06 February 2024)
  • Bank Of Ireland Mortgage Bank v Gillespie (Approved) [2024] IEHC 41 (06 February 2024)
  • Murphy v An Bord Pleanala (Approved) [2024] IEHC 59 (06 February 2024)
  • YMA v Minister for Justice (Approved) [2024] IEHC 58 (06 February 2024)
  • Ryanair Ltd v On The Beach Ltd (Approved) [2024] IEHC 40 (06 February 2024)
  • Re Mary Dooley, DECD (Approved) [2024] IEHC 57 (02 February 2024)
  • Commissions For Communications Regulations v Eircom Ltd (Approved) [2024] IEHC 49 (02 February 2024)
  • John Donnelly & Sons Ltd v Hoey & Anor (Approved) [2024] IEHC 52 (02 February 2024)
  • Flynn & Anor v The Commissioner of An Garda Siochana & Ors (Approved) [2024] IEHC 51 (02 February 2024)
  • Kenny v Legal Costs Adjudicator (Barry Magee) & Anor (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 34 (14 February 2024)
  • In The Matter of Part III Chapter 4 of The Personal Insolvency Acts 2012-2021 and In the Matter of David Langan ("The Debtor") (Approved) [2024] IECA 31 (13 February 2024)
  • Carroll v Commissioner of The Garda Siochana & Ors (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 32 (09 February 2024)
  • Sheehy v Minister for Finance & Ors (Approved) [2024] IECA 30 (08 February 2024)
  • Crowe & Anor v Danske Bank & Ors (Approved) [2024] IECA 29 (07 February 2024)
  • Anderson & anor v Fitzgerald & anor (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 27 (02 February 2024)
  • A v The Minister for Justice (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 26 (02 February 2024)
  • Farrell v Everyday Finance (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 16 (26 January 2024)
  • Higgins v Motor Insurer's Bureau of Ireland & Anor (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 33 (25 January 2024)
  • The Leinster Leader Ltd v Formpress Publishing Ltd (Approved) [2024] IECA 15 (24 January 2024)
  • O'Neill v Birthisle (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 17 (23 January 2024)
  • Farrell v Everyday Finacnce DAC & Ors (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 12 (23 January 2024)
  • Sheehan v Cork County Council (Approved) [2024] IECA 23 (22 January 2024)
  • Director of Public Prosecutions v P.M. (Approved) [2024] IECA 21 (22 January 2024)
  • Director of Public Prosecutions v Kinsella (Approved) [2024] IECA 20 (19 January 2024)
  • Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank v Murray & Anor (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 11 (19 January 2024)
  • Director of Public Prosecutions v B.M. (Approved) [2024] IECA 19 (18 January 2024)
  • Criminal Assets Bureau v Cash (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 13 (18 January 2024)
  • McDonagh v Ulster Bank Ireland DAC & Ors (Approved) [2024] IECA 10 (18 January 2024)
  • L.W & R.L v The Health Service Executive (Unapproved) [2024] IECA 9 (17 January 2024)
  • M/21/005 - eir/Evros [2021] IECompA m21005 (19 February 2021)
  • M/21/002 - Blackstone/Liftoff Mobile [2021] IECompA m21002 (15 February 2021)
  • M/20/005 - ESB/Coillte (JV) [2021] IECompA m20005 (5 February 2021)
  • M/20/041 CapVest/CCIF Core [2021] IECompA m20041 (5 February 2021)
  • M/21/001 - Koguma/Agile DC [2021] IECompA m21001 (4 February 2021)
  • M/20/040 Chadwicks/Haylen [2021] IECompA m20040 (4 February 2021)
  • M/20/029 - Brookfield (Greenergy)/Amber Oil [2021] IECompA m20029 (26 January 2021)
  • M/20/039 - Cube Telecom/GTT Communications [2021] IECompA m20039 (14 January 2021)
  • M/20/036 - UPMC/Aut Even [2021] IECompA m20036 (14 January 2021)
  • M/20/033 - Goldman Sachs/Blanchardstown Shopping Centre [2020] IECompA m20033 (21 December 2020)
  • M/20/035 Presidio/Arkphire [2020] IECompA m20035 (15 December 2020)
  • M/20/034 - Cardinal Ireland Partners Fund SCSp / Mowlam Healthcare [2020] IECompA m20034 (4 December 2020)
  • M/20/023 - United Molasses/Premier Molasses and Kruden [2020] IECompA m20023 (25 November 2020)
  • M/20/032 - Speed Fibre/Magnet Networks [2020] IECompA m20032 (24 November 2020)
  • M/20/031 - Caldic/Brand-Nu & BNL [2020] IECompA m20031 (23 November 2020)
  • M/20/027 - Uniphar/Hickey's [2020] IECompA m20027 (19 November 2020)
  • M/20/028 - Applied Materials/Kokusai Electric [2020] IECompA m20028 (9 October 2020)
  • M/20/024 - Bunzl/Abco Kovex [2020] IECompA m20024 (30 September 2020)
  • M/20/026 - Rocketsports/BenchWarmers [2020] IECompA m20026 (25 September 2020)
  • M/20/025 - EQT/EdgeConnex [2020] IECompA m20025 (17 September 2020)
  • Mr X and Workplace Relations Commission (Health Service Executive) [2024] IEIC 138389 (12 February 2024)
  • Mr X and Eirgrid (Eirgrid) [2024] IEIC 142828 (12 February 2024)
  • Mr X and Chief State Solicitor's Office (Chief State Solicitor's Office) [2024] IEIC 142895 (2 February 2024)
  • Mr W and Sunbeam House Services (Sunbeam House Services) [2024] IEIC 141074 (31 January 2024)
  • Ms X and Sunbeam House Services (Sunbeam House Services) [2024] IEIC 141105 (31 January 2024)
  • Mr X and Health Service Executive (Health Service Executive) [2024] IEIC 137932 (31 January 2024)
  • Ms Y and Sunbeam House Services (Sunbeam House Services) [2024] IEIC 141106 (31 January 2024)
  • Ms Z and Sunbeam House Services (Sunbeam House Services) [2024] IEIC 141459 (31 January 2024)
  • Mr. X and Health Service Executive (Health Service Executive) [2024] IEIC 139258 (30 January 2024)
  • Mr A and Department of Transport (Department of Transport) [2024] IEIC 140045 (30 January 2024)
  • Mr. X and RTE (RTE) [2024] IEIC 143367 (29 January 2024)
  • Ms. X and Department of Justice (Department of Justice (the Department)) [2024] IEIC 137529 (29 January 2024)
  • Mr Z and Standards in Public Office Commission (Standards in Public Office Commission) [2024] IEIC 142376 (26 January 2024)
  • Mr. X and Department of Health (the Department) (Department of Health) [2024] IEIC 134217 (24 January 2024)
  • Mr X and Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman) [2024] IEIC 142455 (19 January 2024)
  • Company X and Health Products Regulatory Authority (Health Products Regulatory Authority) [2024] IEIC 135074 (17 January 2024)
  • Mr X and Health Service Executive (Health Service Executive) [2024] IEIC 140162 (17 January 2024)
  • Mr X and Cork City Council (Cork City Council) [2024] IEIC 142457 (12 January 2024)
  • Ms Z and Cork County Council (Cork County Council) [2024] IEIC 141681 (10 January 2024)
  • Mr X and Children's Health Ireland (Children's Health Ireland) [2024] IEIC 141486 (8 January 2024)
  • MOROZOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 37564/19 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 151 (15 February 2024)
  • ASADULLAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 1510/21 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 154 (15 February 2024)
  • LOZAY v. HUNGARY - 40246/19 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : First Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 152 (15 February 2024)
  • KRATKY v. SLOVAKIA - 35025/20 (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial : First Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 157 (15 February 2024)
  • SKOBERNE v. SLOVENIA - 19920/20 (Article 6+6-3-d - Right to a fair trial : First Section) [2024] ECHR 142 (15 February 2024)
  • YEMANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 42771/19 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 153 (15 February 2024)
  • COLOMBIER v. FRANCE - 14925/18 (No Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life : Fifth Section) French Text [2024] ECHR 143 (15 February 2024)
  • BRYG-A, TOV v. UKRAINE - 75237/10 (Struck out of the list : Fifth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 158 (15 February 2024)
  • BAGOJE v. MONTENEGRO - 2890/21 (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial : First Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 155 (15 February 2024)
  • RUDIK AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 13050/17 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 148 (15 February 2024)
  • U v. FRANCE - 53254/20 ( Expulsion - Enforcement of the removal order of a Russian national of Chechen origin - Remainder inadmissible : Fifth Section) French Text [2024] ECHR 145 (15 February 2024)
  • D.S. v. ARMENIA - 82348/17 (Article 5 - Right to liberty and security : Fifth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 149 (15 February 2024)
  • ZAVGORODNIY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 28355/18 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 150 (15 February 2024)
  • SLIVIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 28279/21 (Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 156 (15 February 2024)
  • SHYLINA v. UKRAINE - 2412/19 (Control of the use of property - Remainder inadmissible : Fifth Section) [2024] ECHR 141 (15 February 2024)
  • DMITRIYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 4604/17 (Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association : Fourth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 147 (15 February 2024)
  • JARRE v. FRANCE - 14157/18 (No Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property : Fifth Section) French Text [2024] ECHR 144 (15 February 2024)
  • DONATI v. ITALY - 37760/02 (Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property : First Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 146 (15 February 2024)
  • JANN-ZWICKER AND JANN v. SWITZERLAND - 4976/20 (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial : Third Section) [2024] ECHR 135 (13 February 2024)
  • JAKUTAVICIUS v. LITHUANIA - 42180/19 (No Article 6 - Right to a fair trial : Second Section) [2024] ECHR 138 (13 February 2024)
  • Bytedance v Commission (Interim relief - Digital services - Designation of gatekeepers - Order) [2024] EUECJ T-1077/23_CO (09 February 2024)
  • Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Recevabilite d'une demande ulterieure) (Common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection - Conditions for rejecting such an application as inadmissible - Concept of 'new elements or findings' - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ C-216/22 (08 February 2024)
  • Inkreal (Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Parties to a contract established in the same Member State� – Jurisdiction of the courts of another Member State to settle disputes arising from that contract - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ C-566/22 (08 February 2024)
  • Pilatus Bank v ECB (Appeal - Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ C-256/22P (08 February 2024)
  • Pilatus Bank v ECB (Appeal - Economic and monetary policy - Prudential supervision of credit institutions - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ C-750/21P (08 February 2024)
  • Valentina Heights (VAT - Option for the Member States to apply a reduced rate of VAT to certain supplies of goods and services - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ C-733/22 (08 February 2024)
  • VP v Cedefop (Civil service - Members of the temporary staff - Fixed-term contract - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ T-563/22 (07 February 2024)
  • Hatherly v AUEA (Civil service - Staff of the EUAA - Recruitment - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ T-40/23 (07 February 2024)
  • Beauty Biosciences v EUIPO - Societe de Recherche Cosmetique (BEAUTYBIO SCIENCE) (EU trade mark - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ T-81/23 (07 February 2024)
  • Shuvalov v Council (Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine - Freezing of funds - Judgment) French Text [2024] EUECJ T-289/22 (07 February 2024)
  • Beauty Biosciences v EUIPO - Societe de Recherche Cosmetique (BEAUTYBIO) (EU trade mark - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ T-80/23 (07 February 2024)
  • Oriflame Cosmetics v EUIPO - Carame (O) (EU trade mark - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ T-74/23 (07 February 2024)
  • J&B v EUIPO - Ergun (J&B BRO) (EU trade mark - Judgment) French Text [2024] EUECJ T-318/23 (07 February 2024)
  • Casal sport v EUIPO - Tennis d'Aquitaine (CITY STADE) (EU trade mark - Judgment) French Text [2024] EUECJ T-220/23 (07 February 2024)
  • Weinart Handelsgesellschaft v EUIPO - Donnafugata (KABI) (EU trade mark - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ T-302/23 (07 February 2024)
  • Topper Argentina v EUIPO - Ningbo Xiangxinli Network Technology (wetoper) (EU trade mark - Judgment) French Text [2024] EUECJ T-630/22 (07 February 2024)
  • Usmanov v Council (Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine - Freezing of funds - Judgment) French Text [2024] EUECJ T-237/22 (07 February 2024)
  • Darila v EUIPO - Original Buff (Buffet) (EU trade mark - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ T-101/23 (07 February 2024)
  • Ryanair v Commission (KLM II ; COVID-19) (State aid - Aid granted by the Netherlands to KLM in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ T-146/22 (07 February 2024)
  • XH v Commission (Civil service - Officials - Promotion - Judgment) [2024] EUECJ T-353/22 (07 February 2024)
  • Board of Appeal of the ESAs- decision on "A" vs ESMA (Board of Appeal) [2021] EUBOA BoA_D_2021_02 ((29 March 2021))
  • Board of Appeal of the ESAs- Decision on Howeverton vs EBA (Board of Appeal) [2021] EUBOA BoA_D_2021_01 ((15 January 2021))
  • Board of Appeal of the ESAs- Decision on Howerton vs EIOPA (Board of Appeal) [2020] EUBOA BoA_D_2020_02 ((04 November 2020))
  • Board of Appeal of the ESAs- Decision on Howerton vs ESMA (Board of Appeal) [2020] EUBOA BoA_D_2020_01 ((12 October 2020))
  • ESAs BoA Decision on Scope Ratings v ESMA (Board of Appeal) [2021] EUBOA BoA_D_2020_03 ((11 January 2021))
  • BOA decision creditreform_rating_ag_vs_eba (Board of Appeal) [2019] EUBOA boa_2019_d_05 ((08 October 2019))
  • Svenska Handelsbanken AB & Ors v ESMA (Board of Appeal) [2019] EUBOA BoA_2019_01.html (27 February 2019)
  • Appeal by Svenska Handelsbanken AB, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB, Swedbank A and Nordea Bank Abp against the European Securities and Markets Authority (Board of Appeal) [2019] EUBOA BoA_D_2019_01 ((27 February 2019))
  • BoA Decision SEB appeal 30 November 2018 (Board of Appeal) [2018] EUBOA BoA_D_30_18 ((30 November 2018))
  • Decision in an Appeal by B. against a decision of the European Securities and Markets Authority (Board of Appeal) [2018] EUBOA BoA_D_2018_02 ((26 September 2018))
  • B v ESMA (Board of Appeal) [2018] EUBOA BoA_2018_02.html (26 September 2018)
  • A v ESMA (Board of Appeal, Joint Committee) [2018] EUBOA BoA_2018_01 (30 April 2018)
  • FinancialCraft Analytics Sp. z o.o. vs ESMA BoA Decision (Board of Appeal, Credit Rating Agencies) [2017] EUBOA BoA_2017_01 ((20 July 2017))
  • FinancialCraft Analytics Sp. z o.o. vs ESMA BoA Decision (Board of Appeal, Credit Rating Agencies) [2017] EUBOA BoA_2017_01_.html (20 July 2017)
  • BoA 2016- 001 (Decision Kluge v EBA) (Board of Appeal) [2016] EUBOA 2016_001 ((26 January 2016))
  • Kluge v EBA (Board of Appeal) [2016] EUBOA BoA_2016_001.html (26 January 2016)
  • Onix Asigurari SA v Lentini (Joint Committee, Board of Appeal) [2015] EUBOA BoA_2015_001.html (14 August 2015)
  • Decision of the Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities given under Article 60 of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and the Board of Appeal-�s Rules of Procedure (BOA 2012 002) (Joint Committee, Board of Appeal) [2015] EUBOA _2015_001 ((14 August 2015))
  • Decision by the ESA BoA concerning Investor Protection Europe sprl (Joint Committee, Board of Appeal) [2014] EUBOA 2014__05 ((02 December 2014))
  • Investor Protection Europe SPRL (Joint Committee, Board of Appeal) [2014] EUBOA BoA_2014_05.html (02 December 2014)
  • Emirates NBD Bank P.J.S.C. v Almakhawi and Ors [2023] JRC 243 (05 December 2023)
  • AG v Carr [2023] JRC 240 (01 December 2023)
  • M v AG [2023] JRC 238 (30 November 2023)
  • Representation of BOS Trustee Limited [2023] JRC 242 (30 November 2023)
  • Hard Rock Limited and Anor v HRCKY Limited [2023] JRC 236 (23 November 2023)
  • A.S. Airline Services (C.I.) Limited v Ports of Jersey Limited [2023] JRC 230 (21 November 2023)
  • AG v Louis [2023] JRC 225 (20 November 2023)
  • AG v Bellot [2023] JRC 223 (15 November 2023)
  • AG v Mazurke [2023] JRC 221 (15 November 2023)
  • AG v King [2023] JRC 219 (15 November 2023)
  • X v AG [2023] JRC 216 (14 November 2023)
  • Bisson v AG [2023] JRC 212 (09 November 2023)
  • AG v Manson and Louis [2023] JRC 210 (08 November 2023)
  • Buckley v Minister for Treasury and Resources and Ors [2023] JRC 209 (07 November 2023)
  • Turner v AG [2023] JRC 207 (07 November 2023)
  • AG v W [2023] JRC 206 (03 November 2023)
  • AG v Grihault [2023] JRC 204 (31 October 2023)
  • L v M (Family) [2023] JRC 211 (31 October 2023)
  • AG v Bellot [2023] JRC 202 (27 October 2023)
  • AG V Mazurke [2023] JRC 220 (27 October 2023)
  • Imperium Trustees v. J.C.A. [2023] 1 JLR 229 (31 May 2023)
  • In re Andha Trust [2023] 1 JLR 192 (17 May 2023)
  • Forward v Others [2023] 1 JLR_Note 2 (14 May 2023)
  • DIX and ORS V SIGMA GROUP [2023] 1 JLR_Note 1 (23 April 2023)
  • S.G. Kleinwort Hambros v. B [2023] 1 JLR 167 (02 April 2023)
  • Comptroller of Revenue v. B Ltd. [2023] 1 JLR 152 (27 March 2023)
  • In re Indigo Trust [2023] 1 JLR 132 (21 March 2023)
  • IN RE PRODUCTION ORDER [2023] 1 JLR 110 (07 March 2023)
  • B v. D [2023] 1 JLR 99 (17 February 2023)
  • In re B [2023] 1 JLR 81 (17 January 2023)
  • Att. Gen. v. Akhonya [2022] 2 JLR 305 (12 December 2022)
  • AG V HADIKIN [2022] 2 JLR_Note 3 (05 December 2022)
  • Vidya v. Sumner Group [2022] 2 JLR 283 (28 November 2022)
  • PEARCE V AG [2022] 2 JLR_Note 2 (24 November 2022)
  • Pearce v. Home Affairs Min. [2022] 2 JLR 256 (23 November 2022)
  • In re CC [2022] 2 JLR 234 (08 November 2022)
  • In re Mattas [2022] 2 JLR 229 (03 November 2022)
  • D v. Att. Gen. [2022] 2 JLR 215 (24 October 2022)
  • Monteagle v Others [2022] 2 JLR_Note 1 (14 October 2022)
  • Equity Trust v. Halabi [2022] 2 JLR 318 (13 October 2022)
  • The Attorney General v AB, AC and NK [2017] SHCA 72 (05 October 2017)
  • Thomas,R. v [2017] SHCA 1 (16 September 2017)
  • A v The Attorney General of St Helena [2019] SHSC 1 (18 July 2019)
  • George, R (on the application of) v Attorney General [2017] SHSC 1 (04 August 2017)
  • Attorney General v K & Anor [2015] SHSC 1 (23 April 2015)
  • The Health and Social Care Department v SB & Ors [2014] SHSC 1 (24 March 2014)
  • Gibson Consultants Ltd v The Emirates Capital Limited [2024] DIFC CFI 092 (08 February 2024)
  • Alexander Reuter (2) Carlo Pianese (3) Andre Bledjian v (1) Wellness United INC. (2) Jacob Logothetis (AKA Iakovos Logothetis) (3) Angela Turovskaya [2024] DIFC CFI 107 (07 February 2024)
  • Alexander Reuter (3) Andre Bledjian v (1) Wellness United INC (2) Jacob Logothetis (AKA Iakovos Logothetis) (3) Angela Turovskaya [2024] DIFC CFI 108 (07 February 2024)
  • BAM Higgs and Hill LLC v (1) Affan Innovative Structures LLC (2) Amer Affan [2024] DIFC CFI 106 (07 February 2024)
  • Bank Sarasin-alpen (ME) Limited (2) Shahab Haider (In His Capacity as Liquidator of Bank Sarasin-alpen (ME) Limited) v (1) Mr Elie Vivien Sassoon & Ors [2024] DIFC CFI 009 (07 February 2024)
  • Jeffrey Stone v Abhi Fintech Limited [2024] DIFC CFI 089 (07 February 2024)
  • Ahmed Seddiq Mohamed Samea Almutawa v Mohamed Seddiq Mohamed Samea Almutawa [2024] DIFC CFI 095 (06 February 2024)
  • First Middle East Distribution DMCC v Orange Chameleon Limited [2024] DIFC CFI 066 (05 February 2024)
  • Najee v Nash [2024] DIFC SCT 496 (26 January 2024)
  • Westford Trade Services DMCC (2) Westford Trade Services (UK) Ltd v Dubai Insurance Co PSC [2024] DIFC CFI 033 (25 January 2024)
  • Vision Investment and Holdings Limited v Mahdi Amjad [2024] DIFC CFI 053 (25 January 2024)
  • Kirtanlal International DMCC v State Bank Of India & Ors [2024] DIFC CFI 041 (25 January 2024)
  • ICICI Bank Limited v Bavaguthu Raghuram Shetty [2024] DIFC CFI 034 (22 January 2024)
  • Nohun v Netip [2024] DIFC SCT 440 (19 January 2024)
  • Punjab National Bank, DIFC Branch v NMC Healthcare LLC & Ors [2024] DIFC CFI 079 (19 January 2024)
  • Accuracy Middle East Advisory Ltd v Anabel Debelak [2024] DIFC CFI 020 (19 January 2024)
  • Nufur v (1) Nujir (2) Nopel (3) Nasta (4) Nibil [2024] DIFC SCT 436 (18 January 2024)
  • Moorkath v Expresso Telecom Group Ltd [2024] DIFC CFI 008 (17 January 2024)
  • Nico (2) Nolan v Nash [2024] DIFC SCT 461 (16 January 2024)
  • Neve v Nellie [2024] DIFC SCT 443 (16 January 2024)
  • AC Network Holding & Ors v Polymath Ekar SPV1 & Ors [2023] ADGMCA 0002 (17 November 2023)
  • Global Aerospace Underwriting Managers Ltd & Ors v Global Private Investments Ltd & Ors [2023] ADGMCA 001 (03 July 2023)
  • Skelmore Hospitality Group Ltd v Rosewood Hotel Abu Dhabi LLC [2020] ADGMCA 0003 (31 March 2020)
  • Skelmore Hospitality Group Ltd v Rosewood Hotel Abu Dhabi LLC [2020] ADGMCA 0002 (12 February 2020)
  • Skelmore Hospitality Group Ltd v Rosewood Hotel Abu Dhabi LLC [2020] ADGMCA 0001 (26 January 2020)
  • Skelmore Hospitality Group Ltd v Rosewood Hotel Abu Dhabi LLC [2019] ADGMCA 0001 (1 September 2019)
  • Al Ayar v Klinkhamer [2024] ADGMCFI 0002 (06 February 2024)
  • Wu v MEpay Technology Ltd [2024] ADGMCFI 0001 (23 January 2024)
  • NMC Healthcare Ltd & Ors v Shetty & Ors (Rev1) [2023] ADGMCFI 0024 (29 December 2023)
  • Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC v Manghat (Manghat Directions Application) [2023] ADGMCFI 0025 (29 December 2023)
  • Elnaggar & Partners Ltd v Abu Dhabi Global Market Registration Authority (Costs) [2023] ADGMCFI 0023 (12 December 2023)
  • NMC Healthcare Ltd, Re (Extra-territorial scope of the power) [2023] ADGMCFI 0022 (05 December 2023)
  • Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC v Manghat [2023] ADGMCFI 0021 (14 November 2023)
  • NMC Healthcare Ltd v Dubai Islamic Bank PJSC & Anor [2023] ADGMCFI 0020 (02 November 2023)
  • Elnaggar & Partners Ltd v Abu Dhabi Global Market Registration Authority [2023] ADGMCFI 0019 (24 October 2023)
  • McCrae v The Loreau Group FZ LLC & Anor (non-repayment of a corporate debt) [2023] ADGMCFI 0018 (19 October 2023)
  • NMC Healthcare Ltd & Ors v Dubai Islamic Bank PJSC & Anor (non-repayment of a corporate debt) [2023] ADGMCFI 0017 (25 July 2023)
  • A8 v B8 (Consequential Hearing - Noor Contempt Applications) [2023] ADGMCFI 0015 (26 June 2023)
  • NMC Healthcare Ltd v Noor Capital PSC & Ors [2023] ADGMCFI 0016 (26 June 2023)
  • NMC HEALTHCARE LIMITED SHETTY [2023] ADGMCFI 0014 (10 June 2023)
  • AC Network Holding Ltd & Ors v Polymath Ekar SPV1 & Ors [2023] ADGMCFI 0013 (07 June 2023)
  • Union Properties PJSC & Anor v Trinkler & Partners Ltd & Ors [2023] ADGMCFI 0011 (09 May 2023)
  • A6 v B6 [2023] ADGMCFI 0010 (27 April 2023)
  • Union Properties P.J.S.C & Anor v Trinkler & Ors [2023] ADGMCFI 0009 (24 April 2023)
  • AC Network Holding Ltd & Ors v Polymath Ekar SPV1 & Ors [2023] ADGMCFI 0008 (07 April 2023)
  • A6 v B6 [2023] ADGMCFI 0005 (13 March 2023)
  • Waqar Zaman v Meinhardt BIM Studios LLC and Meinhardt (Singapore) Pte [2024] QIC (F) 5 (14 February 2024)
  • Stephen Ferris v Sanguine Investment Managers LLC and Christopher John Leach [2024] QIC (E) 1 (14 February 2024)
  • Asma Abdulaziz Al-Saud v Devisers Advisory Services LLC [2024] QIC (A) 3 (04 February 2024)
  • MANAN JAIN v DEVISERS ADVISORY SERVICES LLC [2024] QIC (A) 2 (04 February 2024)
  • HKA Global Limited v Al Jaber Engineering Company WLL [2024] QIC (F) 4 (28 January 2024)
  • HKA Global Limited v Setta Wa Eshroon SOLB WLL (In Liquidation and represented by its Judicial Liquidator, Mr Mareshi Abdulaziz Abdalla) [2024] QIC (F) 2 (21 January 2024)
  • Klaas Bouwman v Kofler Group Middle East LLC [2024] QIC (A) 1 (14 January 2024)
  • Aegis Services LLC v (1) EMobility Certification Services; (2) Muhammad Nawab; (3) Mohith Mohan; and (4) Marilyn Biares. [2024] QIC (C) 2 (10 January 2024)
  • Qatar Financial Centre Authority v Horizon Crescent Wealth LLC [2024] QIC (F) 1 (08 January 2024)
  • Xavier Roig Castello v Match Hospitality Consultants LLC [2024] QIC (C) 1 (02 January 2024)
  • Tahar Rais v Al Fardan Group and Aliz Technologies QFZ LLC [2023] QIC (F) 49 (19 December 2023)
  • AIG MEA LIMITED [2023] QIC (F) 48 (16 December 2023)
  • Accord Pitch LLC v New Smart Contracting and Services WLL [2023] QIC (C) 7 (03 December 2023)
  • Whitepencil LLC v Ahmed Barakat [2023] QIC (F) 47 (30 November 2023)
  • Infinity Solutions LLC v Qatar Financial Centre Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 4 (09 November 2023)
  • Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP v Harinsa Contracting Company (Qatar) WLL [2023] QIC (F) 46 (09 November 2023)
  • Amberberg Limited and Prime Financial Solutions LLC v Thomas Fewtrell, Nigel Perera and Louise Kidd [2023] QIC (F) 45 (09 November 2023)
  • Hadi Jaloul v Experts Credit Solutions Consultancy LLC [2023] QIC (A) 13 (29 October 2023)
  • Rudolfs Veiss vs Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority [2023] QIC (RT) 3 (12 October 2023)
  • Marilon QFZ LLC v Dalba Engineering & Projects Co Limited and Iyad Shamma [2023] QIC (A) 12 (10 October 2023)
  • In the matter of Ovaskainen v Ovaskainen - Decision [2023] CIFsd 122 (29 December 2023)
  • In the matter of Canterbury Securities, Ltd - Reasons for Decision [2023] CIFsd 121 (18 December 2023)
  • In the matter of China Medonline Inc. - Ex Tempore Judgment [2023] CIFsd 120 (15 December 2023)
  • A (B) v X, Y and Z FSD 88 of 2023 (IKJ) - Ex Tempore Judgment [2023] CIFsd 119 (14 December 2023)
  • Fortunate Drift v Canterbury Securities Ltd - Ex Tempore Judgment [2023] CIFsd 118 (13 December 2023)
  • In the matter of Position Mobile SEZC - Judgment (Appeal) [2023] CIFsd 117 (12 December 2023)
  • In the matter of the G Trust - Ruling [2023] CIFsd 115 (11 December 2023)
  • Securities and Exchange Commission v Terraform Labs PTE Ltd - Judgment [2023] CIFsd 116 (11 December 2023)
  • In the matter of China Aoyuan Group Limited - Judgment [2023] CIFsd 114 (07 December 2023)
  • In the matter of Maximus Limited - Judgment [2023] CIFsd 113 (06 December 2023)
  • Family (Global Godfathers) SPC et al. v Oussama Ammar et al. - Judgment [2023] CIFsd 112 (04 December 2023)
  • In the matter of Aubit International - Judgment [2023] CIFsd 111 (01 December 2023)
  • In the matter of Seahawk China Dynamic Fund - Judgment [2023] CIFsd 110 (01 December 2023)
  • In the matter of Position Mobile Ltd SEZC - Judgment [2023] CIFsd 108 (30 November 2023)
  • In the matter of Northeast Securities Co., Ltd v Tricor Services and International Corporation Services Ltd [2023] CIFsd 109 (30 November 2023)
  • In the matter Of Green Economy Development Limited - Ex Tempore Judgment [2023] CIFsd 107 (29 November 2023)
  • In the matter of BPGIC Holdings - Ruling on Preliminary Issue [2023] CIFsd 106 (20 November 2023)
  • In the matter of New Frontier Health Corporation - Judgment [2023] CIFsd 105 (09 November 2023)
  • In the matter of FGL Holdings - Ruling [2023] CIFsd 104 (08 November 2023)
  • In the matter of Position Mobile Ltd SEZC - Judgment [2023] CIFsd 103 (31 October 2023)
  • Renault SAS v Liberty Engineering Group Pte Ltd (Credit and Security - Guarantees and indemnities) [2024] SGHC(I) 6 (14 February 2024)
  • DBX & Anor v DBZ [2024] SGHC(I) 5 (8 February 2024)
  • DFI v DFJ (Arbitration -� Award -� Recourse against award -� Setting aside) [2024] SGHC(I) 4 (1 February 2024)
  • Reliance Infrastructure Ltd v Shanghai Electric Group Co Ltd (Arbitration - Award - Recourse against award - Setting aside) [2024] SGHC(I) 3 (31 January 2024)
  • MICHAEL A. BAKER (EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF CHANTAL BURNISON, DECEASED) v BCS BUSINESS CONSULTING SERVICES PTE LTD & 2 Ors (Contempt of Court -� Civil contempt) [2024] SGHC(I) 2 (23 January 2024)
  • IRFAN SETIAPUTRA & Anor [2024] SGHC(I) 1 (18 January 2024)
  • THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA v DEUTSCHE TELEKOM AG [2023] SGCA(I) 10 (15 December 2023)
  • CVV & 10 Ors v CWB [2023] SGCA(I) 9 (1 December 2023)
  • GATE GOURMET KOREA CO., LTD. & 3 Ors v ASIANA AIRLINES, INC [2023] SGHC(I) 23 (1 December 2023)
  • CZT v CZU [2023] SGHC(I) 22 (27 November 2023)
  • DBO & 3 Ors v DBP & 4 Ors [2023] SGHC(I) 21 (20 November 2023)
  • DBX & Anor v DBZ [2023] SGHC(I) 18 (15 November 2023)
  • W. POWER GROUP EOOD v MINGYANG WIND POWER [2023] SGHC(I) 20 (10 November 2023)
  • BIDZINA IVANISHVILI & 4 Ors v CREDIT SUISSE TRUST LIMITED [2023] SGHC(I) 19 (2 November 2023)
  • CYW v CYX [2023] SGHC(I) 17 (31 October 2023)
  • CZQ & Anor v CZS [2023] SGHC(I) 16 (27 October 2023)
  • WKR v WKQ & Anor [2023] SGHC(A) 35 (27 October 2023)
  • Credit Agricole Corporate & Investment Bank Singapore Branch v PPT Energy Trading Co. Ltd. [2023] SGCA(I) 7 (24 October 2023)
  • BCBC SINGAPORE PTE LTD & Anor v PT BAYAN RESOURCES TBK & Anor [2023] SGCA(I) 8 (23 October 2023)
  • W. POWER GROUP EOOD v MINGYANG WIND POWER [2023] SGHC(I) 15 (29 September 2023)
  • Skip to Primary Navigation
  • Skip to Content
  • Go to the home page
  • Go to Latest news
  • Go to the sitemap page
  • Go to search
  • Go to the Decided cases
  • Go to the Current cases
  • Go to the Complaints Policies and Judicial Conduct
  • Go to the terms and conditions page
  • Go to the contact us page
  • Go to the accessibility statement page
  • Accessibility
  • Press office

Current cases

  • About the Court
  • Current Cases
  • Decided Cases
  • Latest News
  • Court Procedures
  • Visiting the Court

Cases only appear here a few weeks before the appeal is due to be heard by the Court. Lists of cases seeking permission to appeal to the Court appear on the monthly lists published on our Permission to appeal page , once such an application is determined.

The abbreviations 'FC' and 'AP' stand for 'Funded Client' and 'Assisted Person' respectively. They denote a party in receipt of legal aid - the former in respect of cases from England and Wales and from Northern Ireland and the latter in respect of cases from Scotland.

The Current cases table below can be sorted either in ascending or descending order by clicking on the following title headings:

Cases can also be found by using the search engine below:

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

judicial review case uk

  • Crime, justice and law
  • Courts, sentencing and tribunals

Rape Review Progress Report: Winter 2024

This report provides an update on the progress we have made in implementing the Rape Review Action Plan.

Applies to England and Wales

judicial review case uk

PDF , 358 KB , 42 pages

judicial review case uk

Rape Review Progress Report: Winter 2024 (large print)

PDF , 416 KB , 88 pages

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

The Rape Review Action Plan commits the Criminal Justice System (CJS) to a conscious reversal in the trends following 2016, more than doubling the number of adult rape cases reaching court by the end of this parliament.

At the heart of our approach is the belief that improvements to the systems will be made through greater transparency and accountability. That is why we committed to publishing updates on the progress we have made against the Action Plan. This report outlines the significant progress in delivering actions to change the system for the better.

While the vast majority of actions have been completed, there is much work still to do to ensure that the actions are having the impact they need to. That is why we have extended our Action Plan to December 2024.

The government has also publishes a Criminal Justice System Dashboard, which brings together CJS data to increase public transparency and help identify performance issues so they can be addressed head-on. This dashboard includes specific figures for adult rape, and can be found here: Criminal justice system overview - CJS Dashboard

Related links

End to End Rape Review Progress Report - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

End-to-End Rape Review Report on Findings and Actions - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

End-to-End Rape Review Action Plan: Progress update - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

End to End Rape Review Progress Report: One year on - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Rape Review Progress Report: Two years on - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Is this page useful?

  • Yes this page is useful
  • No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. We’ll send you a link to a feedback form. It will take only 2 minutes to fill in. Don’t worry we won’t send you spam or share your email address with anyone.

IMAGES

  1. Judicial Review: A Practical Guide Third edition

    judicial review case uk

  2. Judicial Reviews • Right to Remain Toolkit

    judicial review case uk

  3. Judicial Review Planning Claims In The UK

    judicial review case uk

  4. PROCESS, STANDING AND REMEDIES IN JUDICIAL REVIEW

    judicial review case uk

  5. case study judicial review

    judicial review case uk

  6. Judicial review revision

    judicial review case uk

VIDEO

  1. Judicial Review

  2. Judicial review in 2023 preview

  3. Visit by the judges of the UK's Superior Courts

  4. don't plead guilty infront of magistrate # criminal case # civil case #judicial

  5. Judicial Review

  6. Sunak Loses Court Case Against His Own Inquiry

COMMENTS

  1. Judicial Review in the UK: A Comprehensive Guide for 2023

    Judicial review is the process by which courts exercise supervisory jurisdiction over the performance of public functions by public authorities. CPR 54.1 states that "application for judicial review" means a request to review the lawfulness of of a legal act or decision, act or omission in connection with the exercise of a public function".

  2. Judicial review

    Judicial review is a type of court proceeding in which a judge reviews the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body. In other words, judicial reviews are a challenge to the way in which a decision has been made, rather than the rights and wrongs of the conclusion reached.

  3. Judicial review reform

    The government introduced the Judicial Review and Courts Bill in July 2021. It received royal assent and became law on 28 April 2022. It also makes a number of procedural changes across the court system. This resulted in a proposed statutory presumption being removed from the final law.

  4. Judicial review

    Judicial review is a kind of court case, in which someone (the "claimant") challenges the lawfulness of a government decision. This can be the decision of a central government department, another government body such as a regulator, a local authority, or certain other bodies when they are performing a public function.

  5. Judicial review: Time for change?

    In January 2017, the Supreme Court considered a judicial review case that claimed the Government needed an Act of Parliament before it could give formal notice of the UK's decision to withdraw from the European Union. The Supreme Court held that an Act of Parliament was required to allow ministers to give this notice.

  6. Judicial review: Plan to reform scrutiny by courts revealed

    But critics of judicial review say the wide-ranging right to bring cases has led judges to go beyond their role in upholding the law and into taking political decisions that should be left to ...

  7. Judicial review: Plan to reform scrutiny by courts revealed

    A type of court case that allows members of the public to challenge the legality of a government decision. It can be a decision by a government department, a regulator, a local council and...

  8. PDF GUIDE SERIES An introduction to Judicial Review

    a case 1. Judicial review is expensive - typical expenses that have to be budgeted for by the claimant include the claimant's lawyers' fees, court fees, and any expert fees. In addition, like other forms of litigation, if you lose a judicial review case, you will normally have to pay the other side's legal costs.

  9. The UK Supreme Court has confirmed the principles for judicial review

    Attempts to narrow the scope of judicial review have long been on the Conservative Party's political agenda. Following the Independent Review of Administrative Law ('IRAL') and the subsequent government consultation on reform of judicial review, the then Lord Chancellor, Robert Buckland, introduced the Judicial Review and Courts Bill ('the Bill') to the House of Commons on 21 July 2021.

  10. Judicial Review Trends and Forecasts 2021: Accountability and ...

    In that case, judicial review was refused at the permission stage, because it was on the basis of both delay and want of merit, with a costs order against the applicants of over £17,000.

  11. Judicial Review consultation launched

    18 March 2021. independent review of administrative law published. proposals seek to protect judges from being drawn into politics. part of plan to seek right balance between citizens' rights ...

  12. Judicial review in English law

    Judicial review is a part of UK constitutional law that enables people to challenge the exercise of power, usually by a public body. A person who contends that an exercise of power is unlawful may apply to the Administrative Court (a part of the King's Bench Division of the High Court) for a decision.

  13. Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2023

    The 2023 edition reflects legislative and practice changes relevant to the Administrative Court over the last year. It includes guidance on: litigants in person. civil restraint orders. starting a claim. applying for permission for judicial review. specific practice points. urgent cases. substantive hearings.

  14. The rise and fall of judicial review in the United Kingdom (Part I)

    min environ The rise and fall of judicial review in the United Kingdom (Part I) par John McEldowney Crédit photo : Tingey Injury Law Firm, Unsplash The Judicial Review and Courts Bill 2021 is a significant intervention by the Executive to reform judicial powers.

  15. Dramatic fall in successful high court challenges to government policy

    The proportion of civil judicial reviews in England and Wales, excluding immigration cases, which claimants won out of total claims lodged fell by 50% on 2020, according to analysis seen by the ...

  16. Judicial Review: What you need to know

    Published 6 November 2019 Immigration clients may be aware of a procedure in law called Judicial Review. This is a process by which the actions and decisions of government can be challenged and...

  17. PDF Knowledge: Where others went wrong

    Knowledge: Where others went wrong - key judicial review cases To reduce the chances of a judicial review, it's worth examining the precedents. Here are nine of the most instructive from...

  18. Application, Grounds and Remedies for Judicial Review

    Section 31 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 provides that applications for mandatory, prohibiting and quashing orders must be made by an application for judicial review. Injunctions can also be granted under section 31 (2) in judicial review cases. Section 31 (3) requires that permissions is needed for every application of judicial review.

  19. Judicial Review Lecture

    (a) a claim for 'judicial review' means a claim to review the lawfulness of- (i) an enactment; or (ii) a decision, action or failure to act in relation to the exercise of a public function

  20. How to stand up to power: Judicial Review & the Human Rights Act

    To bring a judicial review, you must demonstrate a ' sufficient interest ' in the decision, action or inaction. Normally this means you can challenge something that personally affects you or your community. An organisation may also be able to bring a judicial review in relation to a decision, action or inaction that has wider public importance.

  21. BAILII

    Recent decisions lists contain the 20 most recently rendered court judgments for each BAILII court/tribunal database, in reverse chronological order. Last updated 12 February 2024 Courts/Tribunals Intellectual Property Enterprise Court England and Wales Court of Protection Decisions The Parole Board for England and Wales

  22. Apply for a judicial review in an immigration or asylum case

    Apply for a judicial review in an immigration or asylum case How to apply to the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber (UTIAC), how much it can cost and what you can do if your...

  23. Current cases

    Visiting the Court Current cases Cases only appear here a few weeks before the appeal is due to be heard by the Court. Lists of cases seeking permission to appeal to the Court appear on the monthly lists published on our Permission to appeal page, once such an application is determined.

  24. Government in court over chicken poo in River Wye

    A handful of protestors, including water campaigner and musician Feargal Sharkey, were outside court on Wednesday as the case began. At the heart of the judicial review are regulations known as ...

  25. Rape Review Progress Report: Winter 2024

    The Rape Review Action Plan commits the Criminal Justice System (CJS) to a conscious reversal in the trends following 2016, more than doubling the number of adult rape cases reaching court by the ...