All cases

Filters

1475 Cases


  • UKSC/2022/0172

    Judgment given
    Case summary:

    Where a contractual force majeure clause contains a proviso requiring the party which is affected by force majeure to exercise reasonable endeavours to overcome it, can the proviso require the affected party to agree to accept a non-contractual performance?

    Last updated: 7 April 2026


  • UKSC/2025/0200

    Case summary:

    The lawfulness of an out of borough placement made available to a homeless applicant. In particular: Does the scope of an appeal to the County Court under section 204 of the Housing Act 1996 include a breach of the duty under section 208(2) and (4) to notify the host borough of an out of borough placement? In circumstances where a housing applicant cannot be accommodated with their district, what is the extent of the local authority’s obligation under section 208 to secure accommodation that is as close as reasonably practicable to the applicant’s former home?

    Last updated: 3 April 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0041

    Case summary:

    Last updated: 2 April 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0011

    Case summary:

    When a taxpayer appeals against an HMRC penalty on the basis that the underlying tax claimed is not owed, does the burden rest on the taxpayer to prove that he or she is not liable to pay the underlying tax?

    Last updated: 1 April 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0010

    Case summary:

    Is a person “intentionally homeless” for the purposes of section 191 Housing Act 1996 in circumstances where they are served with a landlord’s notice to vacate and subsequently decline an offer of accommodation from the local authority?

    Last updated: 1 April 2026


  • UKSC/2024/0114

    Judgment given
    Case summary:

    Did the terms of an agreement between the Appellant and a third-party (the “Appointed Representative Agreement” or “ARA”), which prohibited the third-party from dealing with Retail Clients, also limit the Appellant’s liability for acts and omissions from the third-party conducting business with Retail Clients?

    Last updated: 1 April 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0026

    Case summary:

    (1) Did the appellant suffer any recoverable loss as a result of the respondent’s alleged breaches of duty? (2) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to refuse to give the appellant permission to amend its statement of case?

    Last updated: 31 March 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0027

    Case summary:

    Did delay in determining the appellant’s asylum decision amount to a breach of her rights under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”)?

    Last updated: 31 March 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0023

    Case summary:

    Does the appellant have standing to bring the claim for judicial review? Did the respondent act unlawfully by relying on data from a 2019 report when making the designations in October 2023? Does the lawfulness of the designations depend on the lawfulness of the fee structure? Was the respondent materially misled that the licensing schemes would not be self-sufficient and cost neutral?

    Last updated: 31 March 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0040


    Case summary:

    Last updated: 31 March 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0039

    Case summary:

    Last updated: 31 March 2026


  • UKSC/2023/0028

    Judgment given
    Case summary:

    Were the lower courts correct to decide that loss suffered by the Respondent, in the form of diminution in value of the Respondent's property as a result of the encroachment of Japanese knotweed from the Appellant's land, was caused by the Appellant's breach of duty in failing to treat the knotweed, in circumstances where the encroachment first arose before the Appellant's breach?

    Last updated: 30 March 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0013

    Case summary:

    Does judicial proceedings immunity cover the commencement of arbitration proceedings?

    Last updated: 30 March 2026


  • UKSC/2023/0029

    Judgment given
    Case summary:

    "Where goods sold Cost & Freight free out are located at their discharge port, on the date of the buyer's default, in the circumstances as found by the GAFTA Appeal Board in the Awards, is "the actual or estimated value of the goods, on the date of default" under sub-clause (c) of the GAFTA Default Clause to be assessed by reference to: a) The market value of goods at that discharge port (where they are located on the date of default); or b) The theoretical cost on the date of default of (i) buying those goods Free on Board at the original port of shipment plus (ii) the market freight rate for transporting the goods from that port to the discharge port free out?"

    Last updated: 30 March 2026


  • UKSC/2026/0008

    Case summary:

    (1) Does section 47B(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (the “ERA”) prevent an employee from bringing a claim under section 47B ERA against a co-worker and/or their employer for being subjected to detriment where that detriment amounts to a dismissal? (2) Were the Court of Appeal bound to apply the earlier decision of Timis v Osipov [2018] EWCA Civ 2321 (“Osipov”) on section 47B(2) ERA in the present appeals and was that decision correctly decided?

    Linked cases

    Last updated: 30 March 2026


Sign up for case email alerts

Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.