Visit JCPCAll cases
1461 Cases
UKSC/2022/0174
•
TAX
Judgment givenCase summary:Does section 298(1)(b) of the Capital Allowances Act 2001 (“the 2001 Act”) entitle the appellants to initial 100% capital allowances for expenditure they incurred in the construction of data centres in an enterprise zone?
Last updated: 9 March 2026
UKSC/2021/0098
•
EU LAW
Judgment givenCase summary:Is a pilot unexpectedly falling ill while off-duty an "extraordinary circumstance which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken" within the meaning of EC Regulation 261/2004 (the "Regulation"), which provides for air carriers to pay compensation to passengers of cancelled flights?
Last updated: 9 March 2026
UKSC/2023/0047
•
HOUSING, LANDLORD & TENANT
Judgment givenCase summary:Does a failure to serve a claim notice on an intermediate landlord with no management responsibilities invalidate a right to manage claim under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002?
Last updated: 9 March 2026
UKSC/2023/0062
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether the current test for an account of profits (where a fiduciary has to pay back money earned due to a breach of a duty) should be changed to introduce a requirement that the fiduciary could not have made the same profit in a way that avoided a breach of duty, i.e. to introduce a test that asks: ‘Could the same profit have been made but for the breach of fiduciary duty’?
Last updated: 9 March 2026
UKSC/2024/0156
•
INTERNATIONAL
Judgment givenCase summary:(1) Does Article 54(1) of the ICSID Convention, properly interpreted, constitute a submission to the jurisdiction by prior agreement for the purposes of section 2(2) State Immunity Act 1978 (“SIA 1978”)? (2) Does section 9 of the SIA 1978 require UK courts to satisfy themselves that there exists a valid arbitration agreement, such that the appellant state was not immune from the adjudicative jurisdiction of the English courts pursuant to section 1(1) SIA?
Linked casesLast updated: 5 March 2026
UKSC/2024/0155
•
INTERNATIONAL
Judgment givenCase summary:(1) Did the Court of Appeal err in law by finding that Article 54(1) of the ICSID Convention, properly interpreted, constitutes a submission to the jurisdiction by prior agreement for the purposes of s2(2) State Immunity Act 1978 (“SIA”). (2) (For the First Appellant only): Did Fraser J err in law by finding that there was a valid arbitration agreement between Spain and the First Respondents for the purposes of s9(1) SIA, such that Spain was not immune from the adjudicative jurisdiction of the English courts pursuant to s1(1) SIA.
Linked casesLegal issue
Last updated: 5 March 2026
UKSC/2026/0001
•
LANDLORD AND TENANT
Permission to Appeal refusedCase summary:Does the “main housing duty” owed under s193(2) Housing Act 1996 end automatically, or does it require a decision of the local housing authority to that effect? If a decision of the local housing authority is required, must that decision be notified to the applicant together with reasons for reaching that decision and with details of the right to request a review? If the local housing authority has not provided notification (on the assumption that there is an obligation to notify), can that breach be used as a defence by the applicant in possession proceedings?
Last updated: 5 March 2026
UKSC/2025/0186
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Permission to Appeal refusedCase summary:In an appeal against a decision to deprive an individual of their British Citizenship under section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981 on the ground that it is “conducive to the public good”, does the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (“SIAC”) have to take a separate approach where the deprivation decision was based on criminal conduct, particularly serious organised crime, rather than the individual’s risk to national security?
Linked casesLast updated: 5 March 2026
UKSC/2025/0154
•
IMMIGRATION
Permission to Appeal refusedCase summary:In an appeal against a decision to deprive an individual of their British Citizenship under section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981 on the ground that it is “conducive to the public good”, does the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (“SIAC”) have to take a separate approach where the deprivation decision was based on criminal conduct, particularly serious organised crime, rather than the individual’s risk to national security?
Linked casesLegal Issue
Last updated: 5 March 2026
UKSC/2026/0027
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 5 March 2026
UKSC/2025/0200
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase 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: 4 March 2026
UKSC/2026/0006
•
EU LAW
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Under the Withdrawal Agreement, is an EU national living in the UK under the pre-settled status scheme eligible for homelessness assistance under the Housing Act 1996? In particular, does Article 13(4) of the Withdrawal Agreement empower the UK to adopt such schemes granting a right to reside “on the basis of” the Withdrawal Agreement to EU citizens who do not satisfy the conditions under Article 13(1)?
Last updated: 4 March 2026
UKSC/2026/0026
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 4 March 2026
UKSC/2026/0025
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 3 March 2026
UKSC/2026/0003
•
COURT PROCEDURE
Permission to Appeal grantedCase summary:If a litigant pays a sum of money owed under a court order, and the court order is subsequently set aside, is the litigant entitled to interest on the sum paid? In this claim, should the respondent therefore have paid interest on the money it held from 2016-2024?
Last updated: 2 March 2026
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.