Bookmark

Current cases

Cases only appear here a few weeks before the appeal is due to be heard by the Court. Lists of cases seeking permission to appeal to the Court appear on the monthly lists published on our Permission to appeal page, once such an application is determined.

The abbreviations 'FC' and 'AP' stand for 'Funded Client' and 'Assisted Person' respectively. They denote a party in receipt of legal aid - the former in respect of cases from England and Wales and from Northern Ireland and the latter in respect of cases from Scotland.

The Current cases table below can be sorted either in ascending or descending order by clicking on the following title headings:

Case ID
Case name

Cases can also be found by using the search engine below:

Displaying 49 results

Current cases
Case ID	Case name	Case summary	Details
UKSC 2021/0213	Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Appellant) v Fisher (Respondent) No 2	What is the correct construction of the anti-avoidance provisions in section 739 and following of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 (and its successor in Chapter 2 of Part 13 of the Income Tax Act 2007)? In particular: i) When does an individual make a transfer of assets so as to come within the scope of section 739 ICTA 1988? ii) When does the motive defence in section 741 ICTA 1988 apply to prevent a charge applying? iii) In the context of the facts of this case, is the charge applied to the relevant transfer contrary to EU law on free movement? iv) When is a charge on income too remotely connected from the transfer on which the liability is based?	Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Appellant) v Fisher (Respondent) No 2
UKSC 2021/0212	Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Respondent) v Fisher and another (Appellants)	What is the correct construction of the anti-avoidance provisions in section 739 and following of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 (and its successor in Chapter 2 of Part 13 of the Income Tax Act 2007)? In particular: i) When does an individual make a transfer of assets so as to come within the scope of section 739 ICTA 1988? ii) When does the motive defence in section 741 ICTA 1988 apply to prevent a charge applying? iii) In the context of the facts of this case, is the charge applied to the relevant transfer contrary to EU law on free movement? iv) When is a charge on income too remotely connected from the transfer on which the liability is based?	Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Respondent) v Fisher and another (Appellants)
UKSC 2022/0048	Byers and others (Appellants) v Saudi National Bank (Respondent)	Whether a claim in knowing receipt requires a claimant to prove a continuing proprietary interest in the property transferred to the defendant in breach of trust, in addition to knowledge on the part of the defendant so as to render his receipt unconscionable.	Byers and others (Appellants) v Saudi National Bank (Respondent)
UKSC 2021/0189	Target Group Ltd (Appellant) v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Respondent)	Whether outsourced loan administration services supplied by Target are standard rated supplies for VAT purposes, or if they fall under the "financial services exemption" under article 135(1)(d) of the Principal VAT Directive, implemented in the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (VATA)?	Target Group Ltd (Appellant) v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Respondent)
UKSC 2022/0066	Skatteforvaltningen (the Danish Customs and Tax Administration) (Respondent) v Solo Capital Partners LLP (in special administration) and others (Appellants)	Whether the Danish Customs and Tax Administration's ("SKAT") claims for the recovery of tax refunds made to the appellants are not admissible before the English courts by reason of Rule 3(1) of Dicey, Morris & Collins on the Conflict of Laws, which says that "English courts have no jurisdiction to entertain an action… for the enforcement, either directly or indirectly, of a penal, revenue or other public law of a foreign State".	Skatteforvaltningen (the Danish Customs and Tax Administration) (Respondent) v Solo Capital Partners LLP (in special administration) and others (Appellants)
UKSC 2021/0181	SkyKick UK Ltd and another (Appellants) v Sky Ltd and others (Respondents)	(1) What is the test for determining "bad faith" in s.3(6) of the Trade Marks Act 1994? (2) If such bad faith is found, what is the correct approach to determining the specification that the proprietor of the trademark should be permitted to retain?	SkyKick UK Ltd and another (Appellants) v Sky Ltd and others (Respondents)
UKSC 2021/0220	Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Respondent) v Professional Game Match Officials Ltd (Appellant)	Is the relationship between a company responsible for providing football referees to the Football League and part-time referees an employment relationship so as to trigger an obligation on the company to deduct Income Tax and National Insurance from the payments it makes to the referees?	Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Respondent) v Professional Game Match Officials Ltd (Appellant)
UKSC 2022/0064	R (on the application of Finch on behalf of the Weald Action Group) (Appellant) v Surrey County Council and others (Respondents)	Under Directive 2011/92 EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017, was it unlawful for the Council not to require the environmental impact assessment for a project of crude oil extraction for commercial purposes to include an assessment of the impacts of downstream greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the eventual use of the refined products of the extracted oil?	R (on the application of Finch on behalf of the Weald Action Group) (Appellant) v Surrey County Council and others (Respondents)
UKSC 2021/0208	TUI Ltd (Respondent) v Griffiths (Appellant)	Whether, and (if so), in what circumstances, can the court evaluate and reject what is described as an "uncontroverted" expert's report?	TUI Ltd (Respondent) v Griffiths (Appellant)
UKSC 2022/0083	Zubaydah (Respondent) v Foreign and Commonwealth Office and others (Appellants)	Is the law applicable to the Respondent's claim the law of England and Wales or the law of the six countries in which he alleges he was unlawfully detained and tortured by the United States' authorities?	Zubaydah (Respondent) v Foreign and Commonwealth Office and others (Appellants)
UKSC 2022/0009	Herculito Maritime Ltd and others (Respondents) v Gunvor International BV and others (Appellants)	What is the proper interpretation of a charter agreement and bills of landing for a vessel, in respect of losses arising out the seizure of the vessel by pirates.	Herculito Maritime Ltd and others (Respondents) v Gunvor International BV and others (Appellants)
UKSC 2022/0168	R (on the application of Iyieke) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)	Whether periods of time the appellant spent in the UK after overstaying a visa should be considered as time in the UK for the purpose of establishing 10 years' continuous lawful residence for an application for indefinite leave to remain in the UK. During the ten year period, the appellant had periods with leave and without leave to remain.	R (on the application of Iyieke) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)
UKSC 2022/0021	R (on the application of Afzal) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)	(1) Was the Court of Appeal correct that leave under section 3C of the Immigration Act 1971 can end without service of any notice of decision? (2) What is the proper construction of section 276B of the Immigration Rules, with regards to overstaying bookended by periods of leave to remain? (3) What is the proper construction of the Home Office's long residence policy guidance, with regards to overstaying bookended by periods of leave to remain?	R (on the application of Afzal) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)
UKSC 2021/0152	Popoviciu (Respondent) v Curtea De Apel Bucharest (Romania) (Appellant)	In a conviction extradition case, is it sufficient for the requested person to show substantial grounds for believing that there is a real risk that his trial was so flagrantly unfair as to deprive him of the essence of his Article 6 rights, and therefore a real risk that his imprisonment in the requesting state will violate his Article 5 rights?	Popoviciu (Respondent) v Curtea De Apel Bucharest (Romania) (Appellant)
UKSC 2022/0049	Purchase (Appellant) v Ahmed (Respondent)	Can an individual make a claim for psychiatric injury caused by witnessing the death or other horrifying event of a close relative as a result of earlier clinical negligence?	Full case details for Purchase (Appellant) v Ahmed (Respondent)
UKSC 2022/0044	Polmear and another (Appellants) v Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust (Respondent)	Can an individual make a claim for psychiatric injury caused by witnessing the death or other horrifying event of a close relative as a result of earlier clinical negligence?	Full case details for Polmear and another (Appellants) v Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust (Respondent)
UKSC 2022/0038	Paul and another (Appellants) v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (Respondent)	Can an individual make a claim for psychiatric injury caused by witnessing the death or other horrifying event of a close relative as a result of earlier clinical negligence?	Full case details for Paul and another (Appellants) v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust (Respondent)
UKSC 2021/0149	McCulloch and others (Appellants) v Forth Valley Health Board (Respondent)	In Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015] UKSC 11, the Supreme Court held that a doctor "is under a duty to take reasonable care to ensure that the patient is aware of any material risks involved in any recommended treatment, and of any reasonable alternative or variant treatments." In this appeal, the Supreme Court is asked to decide what test should be applied when assessing whether an alternative treatment is reasonable. It is also asked whether the courts below erred in their approach to the issue of causation.	Full case details for McCulloch and others (Appellants) v Forth Valley Health Board (Respondent)
UKSC 2021/0125	R (on the application of Wang and another) (Respondents) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant)	This appeal raises issues concerning: (1) the meaning of "control" of investment money in the relevant provisions of the Immigration Rules and the facts and circumstances relevant to the assessment of "control"; and (2) the approach to the interpretation of the Immigration Rules.	Full case details for R (on the application of Wang and another) (Respondents) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant)
UKSC 2022/0102	R (on the application of Imam) (Respondent) v London Borough of Croydon (Appellant)	When should a court make a mandatory order against a local housing authority to enforce a duty owed to a homeless individual under s193(2) of the Housing Act 1996 (the "1996 Act")? In particular, should the court take account of either: (a) budgetary constraints imposed on the housing authority; or (b) the availability of housing under a non-secured tenancy under Part VII of the 1996 Act (as opposed to a secured tenancy under Part VI of the 1996 Act).	Full case details for R (on the application of Imam) (Respondent) v London Borough of Croydon (Appellant)
UKSC 2022/0022	R (on the application of Worcestershire County Council) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Respondent)	Which local authority was responsible for the after-care of a service-user who had been detained in hospital under the Mental Health Act 1983 (the "1983 Act")? The case turns on the issue of where the service-user had been "ordinarily resident…immediately before being detained" for the purposes of s.117(3)(a) of the 1983 Act.	Full case details for R (on the application of Worcestershire County Council) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Respondent)
UKSC 2021/0155	Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (Appellant) v Central Arbitration Committee and another (Respondents)	Did the CAC's refusal to accept the Union's application to be recognised by Deliveroo for collective bargaining interfere with the rights of Deliveroo riders to form and join a trade union under Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights? If so, was this interference justified? Should the courts below have construed section 296(1)(b) of the 1992 Act so as to give effect to Article 11?	Full case details for Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (Appellant) v Central Arbitration Committee and another (Respondents)
UKSC 2021/0120	Secretary of State for Transport (Appellant) v Curzon Park Ltd and others (Respondents)	Did the Court of Appeal err in finding that when determining the development for which planning permission could reasonably have been expected to be granted in relation land, the decision maker is not entitled to take into account applications or decisions relating to other land arising from the compulsory acquisition of land for the same underlying scheme.	Full case details for Secretary of State for Transport (Appellant) v Curzon Park Ltd and others (Respondents)
UKSC 2022/0004	Smith and another (Appellants) v Royal Bank of Scotland (Respondent)	This appeal concerns the proper interpretation of section 140A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The key issue is whether, in assessing the fairness of a relationship, the court can compartmentalise a relationship and, accordingly, consider whether a relationship is unfair at a given point during the relationship, rather than at the end of the relationship.	Full case details for Smith and another (Appellants) v Royal Bank of Scotland (Respondent)
UKSC 2021/0087	Jones (Appellant) v Birmingham City Council and another (Respondents)	Whether Part 4 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009 is incompatible with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.	Full case details for Jones (Appellant) v Birmingham City Council and another (Respondents)
UKSC 2021/0085	Republic of Mozambique (acting through its Attorney General) (Appellant) v Privinvest Shipbuilding SAL (Holding) and others (Respondents)	Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 in finding that none of Mozambique’s claims were "matters" outside the scope of the relevant arbitration agreements.	Full case details for Republic of Mozambique (acting through its Attorney General) (Appellant) v Privinvest Shipbuilding SAL (Holding) and others (Respondents)
UKSC 2022/0075	Philipp (Respondent) v Barclays Bank UK PLC (Appellant)	Whether the Court of Appeal erred in allowing Mrs Philipp’s appeal against the summary decision to strike out her case alleging negligence on the part of Barclays in failing to protect her against fraud?	Full case details for Philipp (Respondent) v Barclays Bank UK PLC (Appellant)
UKSC 2022/0007	Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Appellant) v Vermilion Holdings Ltd (Respondent) (Scotland)	Was the right or opportunity for Mr Noble to acquire the 2007 Option (a) available by reason of his directorship of VHL (section 471(1) ITEPA); or (b) made available by Mr Noble’s employer (section 471(3) ITEPA), thereby subjecting it to income tax under Chapter 5, Part 7 of ITEPA?	Full case details for Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Appellant) v Vermilion Holdings Ltd (Respondent) (Scotland)
UKSC 2022/0046	Wolverhampton City Council and others (Respondents) v London Gypsies and Travellers and others (Appellants)	Can the Court grant final injunctions that prevent persons, who are unknown and unidentified as at the date of the order, from occupying and trespassing on land?	Full case details for Wolverhampton City Council and others (Respondents) v London Gypsies and Travellers and others (Appellants)
UKSC 2021/0078	R (on the application of PACCAR Inc and others) (Appellants) v Competition Appeal Tribunal and others (Respondents)	Are funding agreements entered into with claimants by third parties who play no part in the conduct of the litigation, but whose remuneration is fixed as a share of the damages recovered by the client, "damages-based agreements" ("DBAs") within the meaning of the relevant legislation which regulates such agreements?	Full case details for R (on the application of PACCAR Inc and others) (Appellants) v Competition Appeal Tribunal and others (Respondents)
UKSC 2021/0147	Lifestyle Equities C.V. and another (Respondents) v Ahmed and another (Appellants)	What is the nature and extent of the liability of a director, or senior executive employee, for causing a company to commit a tort of strict liability, here trade mark infringement?	Full case details for Lifestyle Equities C.V. and another (Respondents) v Ahmed and another (Appellants)
UKSC 2021/0150	Lifestyle Equities C.V. and another (Appellants) v Ahmed and another (Respondents)	What is the nature and extent of the liability of a director, or senior executive employee, for causing a company to commit a tort of strict liability, here trade mark infringement?	Full case details for Lifestyle Equities C.V. and another (Appellants) v Ahmed and another (Respondents)
UKSC 2021/0201	Thaler (Appellant) v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (Respondent)	The facts and issues in this case will be published, in due course.	Full case details for Thaler (Appellant) v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (Respondent)
UKSC 2021/0144	JTI POLSKA Sp. Z o.o. and others (Respondents) v Jakubowski and others (Appellants)	Should the Supreme Court depart from the decision in James Buchanan & Co Ltd v Babco Forwarding & Shipping Ltd [1978] AC 141, and hold that the words "… carriage charges, customs duties and other charges incurred in respect of the carriage of the goods" in article 23.4 of the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (the "CMR") include excise duty that becomes payable if goods are stolen in the course of carriage and are deemed to have entered circulation in the country where the theft took place?	Full case details for JTI POLSKA Sp. Z o.o. and others (Respondents) v Jakubowski and others (Appellants)
UKSC 2022/0121	The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd (Appellant) v United Utilities Water Ltd (Respondent) No 2	Can The Manchester Ship Canal Company Limited 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?	Full case details for The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd (Appellant) v United Utilities Water Ltd (Respondent) No 2
UKSC 2021/0138	London Borough of Merton Council (Appellant) v Nuffield Health (Respondent)	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.	Full case details for London Borough of Merton Council (Appellant) v Nuffield Health (Respondent)
UKSC 2021/0233	R (on the application of Palmer) (Appellant) v Northern Derbyshire Magistrates Court and another (Respondents)	Whether an administrator appointed under Part II of the Insolvency Act 1986 is a "director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate" so as to fall within s194(3) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992	Full case details for R (on the application of Palmer) (Appellant) v Northern Derbyshire Magistrates Court and another (Respondents)
UKSC 2021/0195	R (on the application of Toraane and another) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondents)	The Home Secretary’s Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme indirectly discriminates against Palestinian refugees from Syria. This gives rise to three issues.	Full case details for R (on the application of Toraane and another) (Appellants) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondents)
UKSC 2020/0208	R (on the application of Officer W80) (Appellant) v Director General of the Independent Office for Police Conduct and others (Respondents)	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.	Full case details for R (on the application of Officer W80) (Appellant) v Director General of the Independent Office for Police Conduct and others (Respondents)
UKSC 2021/0159	Unger and another (in substitution for Hasan) (Appellants) v Ul-Hasan (deceased) and another (Respondents)	Whether an unadjudicated claim for financial provision under the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (the "1984 Act") survives the death of the respondent and can be continued against their estate.	Full case details for Unger and another (in substitution for Hasan) (Appellants) v Ul-Hasan (deceased) and another (Respondents)