Visit JCPCAll cases
1605 Cases
UKSC/2026/0012
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:Whether the state is entitled, in light of Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights (“A1P1”), to deprive a person of their possessions in the public interest without paying, or ensuring they recover, market value for those possessions, in circumstances where the policy objective of the deprivation measure is not undermined or diminished by ensuring market value is recovered.
Last updated: 11 November 2026
UKSC/2026/0151
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:(1) Where a party adopts a particular position (“position X”) in interim proceedings, is that party estopped by its conduct from adopting a position contrary to position X in a later action between the parties? Does it matter that the party to be estopped successfully amended its position in the first proceedings to remove any inconsistency with that taken in the later action? (2) Did the Court of Appeal correctly apply the causation test for the estoppel by conduct doctrine? (3) Was the Court of Appeal correct to strike out the estopped party’s counterclaim as an abuse of process, rather than leaving the issue to be resolved at trial?
Last updated: 11 November 2026
UKSC/2026/0154
•
COURT PROCEDURE
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Can multiple consumer claims concerning the application of section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 be conveniently disposed of in a single set of proceedings commenced by a multi-claimant claim form pursuant to CPR 7.3?
Last updated: 11 November 2026
UKSC/2026/0150
•
COURT PROCEDURE
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:The level of knowledge for a plaintiff to be considered to have “discovered” fraud under section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980.
Last updated: 11 November 2026
UKSC/2026/0144
•
CRIME
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:In relation to an appeal by way of case stated against a driving conviction, did the High Court of Justiciary fail to address the appellant’s Devolution Minute?
Last updated: 11 November 2026
UKSC/2026/0147
•
EMPLOYMENT
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Can health insurance entitlements under a contract of employment constitute wages for the purposes of an unpaid wages claim brought after dismissal?
Last updated: 11 November 2026
UKSC/2026/0145
•
INSOLVENCY
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:(1) Is the out-of-court appointment of an administrator rendered void if made for an improper purpose? (2) Is a contractual request for information invalid if made for an improper purpose?
Last updated: 11 November 2026
UKSC/2021/0160
•
CONTEMPT
Judgment given[2021] UKSC 58Case summary:(1) 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? (2) 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: 10 November 2026
UKSC/2026/0170
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 10 November 2026
UKSC/2020/0138
•
IMMIGRATION
Judgment given[2022] UKSC 15Case 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 117C(4)(b)-(c) of the NIAA 2002 and paragraph 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: 10 November 2026
UKSC/2026/0133
•
EU LAW
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:(1) Do an Immigration Officer’s words - “You can go” - amount to facilitation by the UK of the Appellant’s residence in accordance with national legislation, as required by Article 10(2) of the Withdrawal Agreement? (2) Does the same satisfy the condition in Article 18(1)(1)(iv) of the Withdrawal Agreement?
Last updated: 9 November 2026
UKSC/2025/0091
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Awaiting judgmentCase summary:In summary, did the Court of Appeal err by: (1) Concluding that the ministerial advice was deficient, in a way which failed to apply the correct standard of Wednesbury irrationality; and then not permitting the Appellant to reconsider the decision in light of full and fresh advice from officials addressing the matters identified by the Court of Appeal. (2) Assuming the role of decision-maker in this case and overstepping its constitutional boundaries. (3) Failing to properly consider what is characterised as the ‘floodgates argument’. (4) Taking into account its recent decision in Dillon, despite that decision being subject of an ongoing appeal to the Supreme Court, and the relevant part of the decision being a section 4 Human Rights Act (“HRA”) declaration that did not change the law. (5) Ignoring the scheme for remedial action under the HRA, and or the Appellant’s appeal rights in relation to Dillon. (6) Concluding, in both its consideration of the substantive appeal and in relation to remedy, that this case was an exceptional one that could be distinguished from other similar Troubles related cases. (7) Concluding that the choice faced by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (“SOSNI”), when considering the appropriate investigative mechanism to discharge the Article 2 European Convention of Human Rights (“ECHR”) investigative obligation, was a “binary one” meaning that the only lawful option available was to order a Public Inquiry. (8) Then ordering the mandatory holding of a public inquiry.
Last updated: 8 November 2026
UKSC/2025/0194
•
TORT
Awaiting judgmentCase summary:Is the CPS advocate immune from suit in respect of anything said or done in the course of a bail hearing, including the disclosure of a vulnerable person’s confidential address to their abusive ex-partner? Does that immunity extend to the police, who included the Appellant’s address in the file for the CPS? If the common law immunity does exist and apply, does it bar claims under the Human Rights Act 1998 and Data Protection Act 2018? Did the Court of Appeal err in reinstating the summary disposal of the Appellant’s Human Rights Act claims?
Last updated: 6 November 2026
UKSC/2026/0114
•
IMMIGRATION
Permission to Appeal grantedCase summary:What is the correct standard of proof for determining whether an individual can access state protection in their home state, for the purposes of establishing whether their deportation would be a breach of their rights under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”)?
Last updated: 6 November 2026
UKSC/2025/0047
•
TAX
Judgment given[2026] UKSC 35Case summary:Does the rule preventing the deduction of penalty payments for the purpose of calculating taxable profits encompass payments made to consumers/consumer organisations in settlement of regulatory investigations?
Last updated: 6 November 2026
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.