Visit JCPCAll cases
1493 Cases
UKSC/2021/0138
•
TAX
Judgment givenCase summary:Section 43(5) and (6)(a) of the Local Government Finance Act 1988 provides for a mandatory 80% relief from non-domestic rates on premises which are occupied by a charity and used wholly or mainly for charitable purposes. The Supreme Court is asked to decide whether Nuffield Health is entitled to this mandatory relief in respect of its occupation of its members-only gym at Merton Abbey.
Last updated: 18 May 2026
UKSC/2021/0201
•
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Judgment givenCase summary:(a) Does section 13(2)(a) of the Patents Act 1977 (the "1977 Act") require a person to be named as the inventor in all cases, including where the applicant believes the invention was created by an AI machine in the absence of a traditional human inventor? (b) Does the 1977 Act provide for the grant of a patent without a named human inventor? (c) In the case of an invention made by an AI machine, is the owner, creator and user of that AI machine entitled to the grant of a patent for that invention?
Last updated: 18 May 2026
UKSC/2022/0121
•
NEGLIGENCE
Judgment givenCase summary:Can The Manchester Ship Canal Company Limited (“MSCC”) bring a private law claim in nuisance and/or trespass against United Utilities Water Limited (“UU”) in respect of unauthorised discharges of untreated foul water by UU into the canal?
Last updated: 18 May 2026
UKSC/2026/0008
•
EMPLOYMENT
Hearing listedCase 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 casesLast updated: 18 May 2026
UKSC/2026/0005
•
EMPLOYMENT
Hearing listedCase 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 casesLast updated: 18 May 2026
UKSC/2025/0081
•
LANDLORD AND TENANT
Hearing listedCase summary:In what circumstances can a party to a contract recover damages for a breach of that contract in respect of losses that were sustained not by the contracting party itself but by its subsidiary?
Last updated: 18 May 2026
UKSC/2025/0047
•
TAX
Hearing in progressCase 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: 18 May 2026
UKSC/2021/0233
•
BANKING/INSOLVENCY
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether an administrator appointed under Part II of the Insolvency Act 1986 is an "officer" of the company within the meaning of the phrase "director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate" so as to fall within section 194(3) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992.
Last updated: 15 May 2026
UKSC/2021/0195
•
IMMIGRATION
Judgment givenCase summary:The sole issue in this appeal is: what is the territorial scope of the public sector equality duty ("PSED") in section 149(1) of the Equality Act 2010, which requires public authorities to have due regard to equality issues?
Last updated: 15 May 2026
UKSC/2020/0208
•
PUBLIC LAW/HUMAN RIGHTS
Judgment givenCase summary:In the context of police misconduct proceedings, is it open to a reasonable disciplinary panel to make a finding of misconduct if an officer’s honest, but mistaken, belief that his life was threatened was found to be unreasonable.
Last updated: 15 May 2026
UKSC/2026/0039
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Hearing listedCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err in finding that the conditions of CHK’s immigration bail do not constitute a sufficient restraint on his liberty to justify a writ of habeas corpus? Did the Court of Appeal err in ordering CHK to pay the respondent’s costs?
Last updated: 15 May 2026
UKSC/2026/0057
•
CRIME
Permission to Appeal refusedCase summary:Last updated: 15 May 2026
UKSC/2021/0056
•
TAX
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether SSE is entitled to claim capital allowances for the expenditure that it incurred in the construction of the Glendoe Hydro Electric Power Scheme (the Scheme). Specifically, whether some elements of the Scheme are properly described as tunnels or aqueducts and so excluded from section 22(1)(a) in Part 2 of the Capital Allowances Act 2001.
Last updated: 15 May 2026
UKSC/2018/0102
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment givenCase summary:See judgment
Last updated: 15 May 2026
UKSC/2025/0145
•
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Hearing listedCase summary:What is the correct approach that UK courts should adopt when determining fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms for global portfolio licences of standard essential patents? Did the Court of Appeal err in reaching its own determination of the FRAND rate in this case, instead of remitting the matter for re-assessment? Did the Court of Appeal err in its approach to the question of payment of royalties on past sales in FRAND licences? Did the Court of Appeal err in its consideration of the effects of parallel foreign patent infringement proceedings?
Linked casesLast updated: 15 May 2026
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.