Visit JCPCAll cases
1417 Cases
UKSC/2022/0009
•
ARBITRATION
Judgment givenCase summary:What is the proper interpretation of a charter agreement and bills of lading for a vessel, in respect of losses arising out the seizure of the vessel by pirates.
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2018/0129
•
CRIME
Judgment givenCase summary:When considering section 26(5) of the Extradition Act 2003, can a distinction properly be drawn between the actions of a person who has done everything reasonably possible to give notice of the appeal and the actions of that person’s solicitor who has not?
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2020/0056
•
TORT
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to hold that the claimants were entitled to a remedy in the tort of private nuisance by reason of the Tate Modern’s use of the top floor of its Blavatnik Building as a viewing platform.
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2020/0107
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Judgment givenCase summary:The appeal raises questions about the proper approach to granting relief under the doctrine of proprietary estoppel. The Supreme Court is asked to decide: (1) Whether a successful claimant’s expectation, in this case of inheritance of a family farm, was an appropriate starting point when considering a remedy; and (2) Whether the remedy granted, namely payment of a lump sum which would in effect result in the sale of the farm, went beyond what was necessary in the circumstances.
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2020/0122
•
PRIVACY/INFORMATION
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether, and to what extent, a person who has not been charged with an offence can have a reasonable expectation of privacy in relation to information that relates to a criminal investigation into his activities.
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2020/0185
•
DEVOLUTION
Judgment givenCase summary:Does the failure to bring into force certain amendments to the Extradition Act 2003 in Scotland give rise to a breach of article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights?
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2020/0084
•
CRIME
Judgment givenCase summary:(1) Does section 13(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000 create a strict liability offence? (2) If so, is section 13(1) compatible with Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2020/0076
•
CRIME
Judgment givenCase summary:(1) Does section 13(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000 create a strict liability offence? (2) If so, is section 13(1) compatible with Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2018/0192
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment givenCase summary:The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc (the "Trustee") is trustee of notes with a nominal value of USD 3bn carrying interest of 5 per cent per annum (the "Notes"). The Trustee has applied for summary judgment of its claim against Ukraine for non-payment of the sums due under the Notes. The Supreme Court is asked to decide whether Ukraine should be permitted to defend the claim at trial. The appeals raise the following issues:(i) Did Ukraine have the capacity to issue the Notes or to ensure into the ancillary contracts?(ii) Were the Notes issued or the ancillary contracts entered into without authority?(iii) Can Ukraine maintain that it was entitled to avoid the Notes for duress exerted by the Russian Federation?(iv) Can Ukraine maintain that non-payment of the sums due under the Notes is a lawful countermeasure?
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2018/0191
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment givenCase summary:The Law Debenture Trust Corporation plc (the "Trustee") is trustee of notes with a nominal value of USD 3bn carrying interest of 5 per cent per annum (the "Notes"). The Trustee has applied for summary judgment of its claim against Ukraine for non-payment of the sums due under the Notes. The Supreme Court is asked to decide whether Ukraine should be permitted to defend the claim at trial. The appeals raise the following issues: (i) Did Ukraine have the capacity to issue the Notes or to ensure into the ancillary contracts? (ii) Were the Notes issued or the ancillary contracts entered into without authority? (iii) Can Ukraine maintain that it was entitled to avoid the Notes for duress exerted by the Russian Federation?(iv) Can Ukraine maintain that non-payment of the sums due under the Notes is a lawful countermeasure?
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2020/0066
•
HOUSING, LANDLORD & TENANT
Judgment givenCase summary:Where a company incorporated by leaseholders in a block of flats acquires the right to manage the block under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 ("the Act"), and the leaseholders also enjoy rights over the estate in which the block is situated, does the company only acquire the right to manage the block itself, or does it also acquire the right to manage the rest of the estate?
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2019/0209
•
EMPLOYMENT
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether a worker’s right to paid annual leave is accumulated according to the working pattern of the worker and/or is pro-rated.
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2019/0215
•
TAX
Judgment givenCase summary:(1) Whether the UK tax treatment of "manufactured overseas dividends" constituted a restriction of the free movement of capital, contrary to Article 63 TFEU. (2) If so, whether this restriction was justified under EU law. (3) If there was a restriction that could not be justified, what is the appropriate remedy.
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2020/0138
•
IMMIGRATION
Judgment givenCase summary:The appeal raises the following issues:A. Does a decision under paragraph 339O of the Immigration Rules as to whether a person can reasonably be expected to stay in part of their country of origin import a value judgment including consideration of that person’s criminal conduct in the UK?B. If the answer to A is No, did FTT Judge Kamara err in law in holding that A could not reasonably be expected to stay in a different part of Jamaica?C. Did FTT Judge Kamara err in law in her assessment of section s117C(4)(b)-(c) of the NIAA 2002 and Para. 399A(b)-(c) of the Immigration Rules in holding that A is socially and culturally integrated in the UK and there would be very significant obstacles to his integration in Jamaica.D. Did FTT Judge Kamara err in law in embarking on a freestanding assessment of Article 8, applying the wrong test and failing to give sufficient weight to the public interest in A’s deportation.
Last updated: 25 November 2025
UKSC/2021/0160
•
CONTEMPT
Judgment givenCase summary:Did the Supreme Court wrongly decide that Mr Crosland’s disclosure of the result of the Heathrow appeal, in breach of an embargo on the Court’s judgment, constituted a contempt of court? Did the Court then wrongly impose a fine of £5,000 on Mr Crosland, and wrongly order him to pay the Attorney General’s costs in the sum of £15,000?
Last updated: 25 November 2025
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.