2013_Judgments_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_Kingdom

2013 Judgments of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

2013 Judgments of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Add article description

This is a list of the 81 judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the year 2013. They are ordered by neutral citation.

The table lists judgments made by the court and the opinions of the judges in each case. Judges are treated as having concurred in another's judgment when they either formally attach themselves to the judgment of another or speak only to acknowledge their concurrence with one or more judges. Any judgment which reaches a conclusion that differs from the majority on one or more major points of the appeal has been treated as dissent.

All dates are for 2013 unless expressly stated otherwise.

Table key


 Delivered a judgment (majority)

Concurred in the judgment of another justice (majority)

Delivered a judgment (dissenting)

Concurred in the judgment of another justice (dissent)

Did not participate in the decision

2013 judgments

More information Case name, Citation ...

Notes

  1. [1]
    An augmented panel of 7 judges sat in this case.
  2. [2]
    The chart shows the judgment on the first issue of jurisdiction. On the other two issues the justices unanimously dismissed the corporate veil appeal and unanimously discharged the freezing injunction.
  3. [3]
    The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He concurred with the majority.
  4. [4]
    The court did not make an order in this case but rather Lord Sumption gave a judgment of the court that referred the question to the Court of Justice of the European Union under Article 267 TFEU.
  5. [5]
    The Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Carloway, also sat on this case. He concurred with the majority judgment.
  6. [6]
    A diminished panel of three justices heard this case.
  7. [7]
    An augmented panel of 9 judges sat in this case.
  8. [8]
    The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He held with the majority that closed material procedures can be adopted by the Supreme Court but partially dissented by holding that such a procedure was not appropriate as regards the appeal in question.
  9. [9]
    The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He, like Lord Neuberger, held that appeal should be allowed but on the procedural grounds alone. Lord Carnwath conversely allowed the appeal but only on the substantive grounds.
  10. [10]
    The chart shows the judgments in respect of the article 2 issue and the question of combat immunity. The justices unanimously held that the case does fall within the UK's jurisdiction.
  11. [11]
    Lord Judge also sat on this case. He and Lord Neuberger gave the lead judgment for the majority.

Judges
Share this article:

This article uses material from the Wikipedia article 2013_Judgments_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_Kingdom, and is written by contributors. Text is available under a CC BY-SA 4.0 International License; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.