Visit JCPCAll cases
1197 Cases
UKSC/2025/0007
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 15 January 2025
UKSC/2024/0045
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Hearing in progressCase summary:(i) Did the Court of Appeal adopt the wrong approach to determining whether the Appellant’s designation was a proportionate interference with his rights under Article 8 and Article 1, Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”)? (ii) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to conclude that maintaining the Appellant’s designation was not a breach of his rights under Article 8 and Article 1, Protocol 1 of the ECHR?
Last updated: 15 January 2025
UKSC/2023/0044
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Judgment givenCase summary:Does an agreement to transfer the beneficial interest in shares in a private company to the legal owner of those shares need to be in writing and signed by each of those making the disposal?
Linked casesLegal issue
Last updated: 15 January 2025
UKSC/2023/0043
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Judgment givenCase summary:Does an agreement to transfer the beneficial interest in shares in a private company to the legal owner of those shares need to be in writing and signed by each of those making the disposal?
Linked casesLast updated: 15 January 2025
UKSC/2023/0068
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:Whether temporary (interim) accommodation provided by local authorities pursuant to the duty at section 29 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 (the “1987 Act”) must meet the specific needs of individual members of the household in order to be suitable for the purposes of section 29(3) of the 1987 Act and article 4(b) of the Homeless Persons (Unsuitable Accommodation) (Scotland) Order 2014 (the “2014 Order”).
Last updated: 14 January 2025
UKSC/2024/1004
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err by: (1) Upholding the judge’s conclusion that the ministerial briefing, which formed the basis for the Minister’s decision to approve a scheme to develop a road next to Stonehenge, was legally adequate? (2) Treating statements that the Secretary of State had ‘considered’ representations as meaning the Minister had seen them? (3) Finding the Secretary of State’s view on the scheme’s compliance with the World Heritage Convention (“WHC”) was sound? (4) Failing to acknowledge the materiality that the scheme would lead to the Site being inserted on the List of World Heritage in Danger (“LWHD”).
Last updated: 14 January 2025
UKSC/2024/1002
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:(1) On a proper construction of section 127(1)(a) of the Communications Act 2003, does private consensual messaging fall within the scope of the offence which the section contains? (2) If private consensual messaging does fall within the scope of section 127(1)(a), are convictions for the appellants’ offences compliant with Articles 8 and 10 of the ECHR?
Last updated: 14 January 2025
UKSC/2019/0193
•
CONSTITUTIONS
Judgment givenCase summary:See judgment
Last updated: 13 January 2025
UKSC/2019/0192
•
CONSTITUTIONS
Judgment givenCase summary:See judgment
Last updated: 13 January 2025
UKSC/2020/0195
•
PROCEDURE
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether the UK Government has recognised Interim President Guaido as Head of State of Venezuela and, if so, whether any challenge to the validity of Mr Guaido’s appointments to the Board of the Central Bank of Venezuela is justiciable in an English court.
Last updated: 13 January 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: 13 January 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: 13 January 2025
UKSC/2025/0006
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 13 January 2025
UKSC/2018/0039
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment givenCase summary:See judgment
Last updated: 10 January 2025
UKSC/2025/0005
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 9 January 2025
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.