The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Upcoming

• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

  Hearing

  26 January 2026

  Ian Green (Respondent) v Public Service Commission (Appellant) (Trinidad and Tobago)

  Lord Lloyd-Jones,

  Lord Briggs,

  Lord Burrows,

  Lord Doherty,

  Sir Anthony Smellie

  Whether the Court of Appeal erred in: (a) Finding the Appellant acted unreasonably in failing to consider the Respondent for promotion? (b) Finding that the Appellant’s decision of 21 April 2015 was arrived at by a process outside of that prescribed by the Public Service Commission Regulations? (c) Finding no interference between Regulation 8 of the Fire Service (Terms and Conditions of Employment) Regulations 1998 and section 121 and 129 of the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago. (d) Holding that Regulation 8 is non-binding on the Appellant unless and until specifically adopted and incorporated into the Public Service (Commission) Regulation. (e) making findings as to the role of the Chief Personnel Officer without affording them an opportunity to be heard. (f) Not placing sufficient weight on the Board’s decisions in The Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue v Finbar Boland and ors [2023] UKPC 27 and Ramsahai v Teaching Service Commission [2011] UKPC 26? (g) finding that if there had been a claim for constitutional relief, and a breach of a constitutional right has been found, it should not matter that the breach found is not the particular breach in respect of which the claim is made? (h) finding that there was a breach of the Respondent’s right to protection of the law under section 4(b) of the Constitution, in circumstances where the Respondent did not claim such relief.

  Linked cases

  JCPC/2024/0088 Ian Green and another (Respondents) v Public Service Commission (Appellant) No 2 (Trinidad and Tobago)

  Legal issue

  ---

• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

  Hearing

  26 January 2026

  Ian Green and another (Respondents) v Public Service Commission (Appellant) No 2 (Trinidad and Tobago)

  Lord Lloyd-Jones,

  Lord Briggs,

  Lord Burrows,

  Lord Doherty,

  Sir Anthony Smellie

  Whether the Court of Appeal erred in: (a) Finding the Appellant acted unreasonably in failing to consider the Respondent for promotion? (b) Finding that the Appellant’s decision of 21 April 2015 was arrived at by a process outside of that prescribed by the Public Service Commission Regulations? (c) Finding no interference between Regulation 8 of the Fire Service (Terms and Conditions of Employment) Regulations 1998 and section 121 and 129 of the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago. (d) Holding that Regulation 8 is non-binding on the Appellant unless and until specifically adopted and incorporated into the Public Service (Commission) Regulation. (e) making findings as to the role of the Chief Personnel Officer without affording them an opportunity to be heard. (f) Not placing sufficient weight on the Board’s decisions in The Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue v Finbar Boland and ors [2023] UKPC 27 and Ramsahai v Teaching Service Commission [2011] UKPC 26? (g) finding that if there had been a claim for constitutional relief, and a breach of a constitutional right has been found, it should not matter that the breach found is not the particular breach in respect of which the claim is made? (h) finding that there was a breach of the Respondent’s right to protection of the law under section 4(b) of the Constitution, in circumstances where the Respondent did not claim such relief.

  Linked cases

  JCPC/2024/0087 Ian Green (Respondent) v Public Service Commission (Appellant) (Trinidad and Tobago)

  Legal issue

  ---

• UK Supreme Court

  Hearing

  27 January 2026

  Akbars Restaurant (Middlesbrough) Limited (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)

  Lord Sales,

  Lord Hamblen,

  Lord Leggatt,

  Lady Rose,

  Lady Simler

  The principal issue concerns the validity of a civil penalty notice issued by the Secretary of State for the Home Department under section 15 of the Immigration Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. In view of the requirement under s.15(6)(a) that a notice must “state why the Secretary of State thinks the employer is liable to the penalty”, is the penalty notice invalid if it does not identify which of the grounds in s.15(1) applies (i.e. by specifying the circumstances in which a person subject to immigration control has no right to work)?

  ---

• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

  Hearing

  28 January 2026

  Uriah Woods (Appellant) v The State (Respondent) No 2 (Trinidad and Tobago)

  Lord Reed,

  Lord Lloyd-Jones,

  Lord Leggatt,

  Lord Stephens,

  Sir Anthony Smellie

  (1) Should fresh psychiatric evidence regarding the appellant, obtained after his conviction for murder, be admitted and considered by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council? (2) Does the fresh psychiatric evidence show that the appellant was not guilty of murder but of manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility or, alternatively, that the appellant was not fit to plead or stand trial? (3) Did the trial judge materially misdirect the jury as to the elements of the defence of provocation?

  ---

• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

  Hearing

  16 February 2026

  Avaria Niles (Respondent) v Judicial and Legal Service Commission and another (Appellants) (Trinidad and Tobago)

  Lord Sales,

  Lord Briggs,

  Lord Burrows,

  Lady Simler,

  Lord Justice Colton

  Did the Court of Appeal err in holding that a claim for judicial review was available to the Respondent and that the statutory scheme governing disciplinary proceedings did not provide an effective alternative remedy for her jurisdictional complaint?

  ---