List of United Kingdom Supreme Court cases
This is a list of judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom between the court's inception on 1 October 2009 and the most recent judgments. Cases are listed in order of their neutral citation and where possible a link to the official text of the decision in PDF format has been provided.
Unless otherwise noted, cases were heard by a panel of 5 judges.
Cases involving Scots law are highlighted in orange. Cases involving Northern Irish law are highlighted in green.
|Case name||Citation||Decided||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|R (E) v JFS|| UKSC 1||14 October||Costs|
|Re Sigma Finance|| UKSC 2||29 October||Insolvency|
|R (L) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis|| UKSC 3||29 October||Police law, Article 8 ECHR|
|Louca v Germany|| UKSC 4||19 November||European Arrest Warrants|
|In re B (A Child) (2009 ruling)|| UKSC 5||19 November||Family law|
|OFT v Abbey National|| UKSC 6||25 November||Consumer rights|
|PE (Cameroon) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 7||26 November||Immigration|
|R (A) v Croydon|| UKSC 8||26 November||Family law, Article 6 ECHR|
|R (Barclay) v Justice Secretary|| UKSC 9||1 December||Government of Sark, Protocol 1, Article 3 ECHR|
|I (A Child)|| UKSC 10||1 December||Jurisdiction|
|Environment Secretary v Meier & Ors|| UKSC 11||1 December||Land law|
|R(A) v B|| UKSC 12||1 December||State secrets, Article 10 ECHR|
|Barratt Homes Ltd v Welsh Water|| UKSC 13||9 December||Water Industry Act 1991|
|R v Horncastle|| UKSC 14||9 December||Evidence, Article 6 ECHR|
|R (E) v JFS|| UKSC 15||16 December||Discrimination|
|Mahad (Ethiopia) v Entry Clearance Officer|| UKSC 16||16 December||Immigration|
|Re S-B (Children)|| UKSC 17||14 December||Family law|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|Re. Guardian News Media, in HM Treasury v Ahmed|| UKSC 1||27 January||Article 8, ECHR; Article 10, ECHR|
|HM Treasury v Ahmed|| UKSC 2||27 January||Terrorism; Asset freezing|
|Office of Communications v The Information Commissioner|| UKSC 3||27 January||Freedom of information|
|Grays Timber Products Ltd v HM Revenue & Customs|| UKSC 4||3 February||Tax law|
|HM Treasury v Ahmed (No 2)|| UKSC 5||4 February||Asset freezing|
|Allison v HM Advocate|| UKSC 6||10 February||Criminal law of Scotland|
|McInnes v HM Advocate|| UKSC 7||10 February||Criminal law of Scotland|
|Tomlinson v Birmingham CC|| UKSC 8||17 February||Homelessness in England|
|Norris v USA|| UKSC 9||24 February||Extradition; Article 8, ECHR|
|Martin v HM Advocate|| UKSC 10||3 March||Scottish Devolution|
|R (Lewis) v Redcar & Cleveland BC|| UKSC 11||3 March||Town Greens|
|Re W (Children)|| UKSC 12||3 March||Family Law|
|Agbaje v Akinnoye-Agbaje|| UKSC 13||10 March||Family Law|
|RTS Flexible Systems Ltd v Molkerei Alois Müller GmbH|| UKSC 14||10 March||Contract law|
|R (JS (Sri Lanka)) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 15||17 March||Terrorism; Immigration|
|British Airways v Williams|| UKSC 16||24 March||Employment law|
|R (F) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 17||21 April||Sexual Offences Act 2003; Article 8, ECHR|
|Farstad Supply v Enviroco|| UKSC 18||5 May||Negligence|
|Inveresk plc v Tullis Russell Papermakers|| UKSC 19||5 May||Scots contract law|
|R (Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd) v Wolverhampton CC|| UKSC 20||12 May||Planning law|
|ZN (Afghanistan) v Entry Clearance Officer|| UKSC 21||12 May||Immigration law|
|Roberts v Gill & Co|| UKSC 22||19 May||Wills|
|OB v Aventis Pasteur SA|| UKSC 23||26 May||Limitation periods|
|Home Secretary v AP|| UKSC 24||16 June||Control orders; Article 8, ECHR|
|MS (Palestinian Territories) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 25||16 June||Immigration law|
|Home Secretary v AP (No 2)|| UKSC 26||23 June||Article 8, ECHR|
|JR17 (Judicial Review App.)|| UKSC 27||23 June||Right to education|
|Austin v Southwark LBC|| UKSC 28||23 June||Landlord-tenant law|
|R(Smith) v Defence Secretary|| UKSC 29||30 June||Article 2, ECHR; Jurisdictional law|
|R (Noone) v Drale Hall Prison|| UKSC 30||30 June||Sentencing|
|HJ (Iran) and HT (Cameroon) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 31||7 July||Immigration law|
|Southern Pacific Loans v Walker|| UKSC 32||7 July||Consumer Credit Act 1974|
|A v Essex CC|| UKSC 33||14 July||Right to education|
|O'Brien v Ministry of Justice|| UKSC 34||28 July||Discrimination law|
|Bocardo SA v Star Energy UK|| UKSC 35||28 July||Trespass|
|R (ZO (Somalia)) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 36||28 July||Immigration law|
|Morrison Sports v Scottish Power|| UKSC 37||28 July||Electricity Act 1989|
|RTS Flexible Systems Ltd v Molkerei Alois Müller GmbH (No 2)|| UKSC 38||21 July||Contract law|
|R v Rollins|| UKSC 39||28 July||Criminal law; Money laundering|
|R (Electoral Commission) v Westminster Magistrates' Court|| UKSC 40||29 July||Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000|
|Gisda Cyf v Barratt|| UKSC 41||13 October||Employment law|
|Radmacher v Granatino|| UKSC 42||20 October||Prenuptial agreements|
|Cadder v HM Advocate|| UKSC 43||26 October||Criminal Procedure, Article 6 ECHR|
|Oceanbulk Shipping & Trading v TMT Asia|| UKSC 44||27 October||Contract law|
|Manchester CC v Pinnock|| UKSC 45||3 November||Housing, Article 8 ECHR|
|Dallah Real Estate & Tourism v Pakistan|| UKSC 46||3 November||Arbitration, ICC|
|Multi-Link Leisure v North Lanarkshire Council|| UKSC 47||17 November||Tenancy agreements|
|R v Maxwell|| UKSC 48||17 November||Retrial|
|MA (Somalia) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 49||24 November||Immigration law, Article 3 ECHR|
|RBS v Wilson|| UKSC 50||24 November||Securities, Property law|
|Customs v Holland|| UKSC 51||24 November||Company law, Insolvency|
|R v Chaytor|| UKSC 52||1 December||Parliamentary privilege, Parliamentary expenses|
|Spiller v Joseph|| UKSC 53||1 December||Defamation, Fair comment|
|R (Child Poverty Action Group) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 54||8 December||Housing benefit|
|Progress Property v Moorgarth Group|| UKSC 55||8 December||Company law|
|Principal Reporter v K|| UKSC 56||15 December||Family law; Article 8, ECHR|
|R (Edwards) v Environment Agency|| UKSC 57||15 December||Costs|
|HM Revenue and Customs v DCC Holdings|| UKSC 58||15 December||Tax law|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|R (Coke-Wallis) v Institute of Chartered Accountants|| UKSC 1||19 January 2011||Employment law|
|Morge v Hampshire County Council|| UKSC 2||19 January 2011||Planning law|
|Yemshaw v Hounslow|| UKSC 3||26 January 2011||Homelessness; Domestic violence|
|ZH (Tanzania) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 4||1 February 2011||Children law; Immigration law|
|GPS Inc. v Syarikat Takaful Malaysia Berhad|| UKSC 5||1 February 2011||Maritime law|
|Manchester CC v Pinnock (No 2)|| UKSC 6||9 February 2011||Article 8, ECHR; Landlord-tenant law|
|Brent LBC v Risk Management Partners|| UKSC 7||9 February 2011||Public procurement|
|Hounslow LBC v Powell|| UKSC 8||23 February 2011||Article 8, ECHR; Homelessness|
|R v Forsyth|| UKSC 9||23 February 2011||Criminal law; International law|
|Sienkiewicz v Greif|| UKSC 10||9 March 2011||Negligence|
|Patmalniece v Secretary for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 11||16 March 2011||Free movement of workers|
|WL (Congo) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 12||23 March 2011||False imprisonment|
|Jones v Kaney|| UKSC 13||30 March 2011||Expert witnesses|
|Duncombe v Schools Secretary|| UKSC 14||30 March 2011||Employment law|
|Communities Secretary v Welwyn Hatfield BC|| UKSC 15||6 April 2011||Planning law|
|Farstad Supply v Enviroco|| UKSC 16||6 April 2011||Company law|
|Baker v Quantum Clothing Group|| UKSC 17||13 April 2011||Negligence|
|R (Adams) v Justice Secretary|| UKSC 18||11 May 2011||Miscarriage of justice|
|HMRC v Tower MCashback|| UKSC 19||11 May 2011||Tax law|
|McCaughey's Application for Judicial Review|| UKSC 20||18 May 2011||Judicial review|
|R (GC) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis|| UKSC 21||18 May 2011||DNA evidence, Article 8 ECHR|
|FA (Iraq) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 22||25 May 2011||EU law|
|SK(Zimbabwe) v Home Secretary|| UKSC 23||25 May 2011||Immigration law|
|Fraser v Her Majesty's Advocate|| UKSC 24||25 May 2011||Scots criminal law; Evidence|
|Bloomsbury v Sea Fish Industry Authority|| UKSC 25||15 June 2011||Fisheries Act 1981; Free movement of goods|
|Parkwood Leisure v Alemo-Herron|| UKSC 26||15 June 2011||TUPE|
|Re. E (Children)|| UKSC 27||10 June 2011||Family law|
|R (Cart) v The Upper Tribunal|| UKSC 28||22 June 2011||Judicial review|
|Eba v Advocate General for Scotland|| UKSC 29||22 June 2011||Judicial review|
|R (G) v The Governors of X School|| UKSC 30||29 June 2011||Article 6, ECHR|
|NML Capital Ltd v Republic of Argentina|| UKSC 31||6 July 2011||State immunity|
|Scottish Widows plc v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 32||6 July 2011||Company law|
|R (McDonald) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea|| UKSC 33||6 July 2011||Assisted living|
|Al Rawi v The Security Service|| UKSC 34||13 July 2011||Secret trial|
|Home Office v Tariq|| UKSC 35||13 July 2011||Secret trial|
|Duncombe v Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (no. 2)|| UKSC 36||15 July 2011||Employment law|
|R v Smith|| UKSC 37||20 July 2011||Criminal law|
|Belmont Park Investments PTY Ltd v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd and Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc|| UKSC 38||27 July 2011||Insolvency law|
|Lucasfilm Ltd v Ainsworth|| UKSC 39||27 July 2011||Intellectual property|
|Jivraj v Hashwani|| UKSC 40||27 July 2011||Discrimination in employment|
|Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher|| UKSC 41||27 July 2011||Employment law|
|Houldsworth v Bridge Trustees Ltd and Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 42||27 July 2011||Pensions law|
|HM Advocate v Ambrose & Ors|| UKSC 43||6 October 2011||Right to counsel; Article 6, ECHR|
|HM Advocate v P|| UKSC 44||6 October 2011||Right to counsel; Article 6, ECHR|
|R (Bibi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 45||12 October 2011||Immigration law; Article 8, ECHR|
|AXA General Insurance Ltd v The Lord Advocate|| UKSC 46||12 October 2011||Negligence|
|R (Gaines-Cooper) v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 47||19 October 2011||Tax law|
|Re. Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Ltd and Re the Insolvency Act 1986|| UKSC 48||19 October 2011||Insolvency law|
|Gale v Serious Organised Crime Agency|| UKSC 49||26 October 2011||Criminal law|
|Rainy Sky SA v Kookmin Bank|| UKSC 50||2 November 2011||Contract law|
|Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly & Co.|| UKSC 51||2 November 2011||Intellectual property|
|Berrisford v Mexfield Housing Co-operative Ltd|| UKSC 52||9 November 2011||Land law|
|Jones v Kernott|| UKSC 53||9 November 2011||Land law|
|McGowan v B|| UKSC 54||23 November 2011||Right to counsel; Article 6, ECHR|
|Jude v HM Advocate|| UKSC 55||23 November 2011||Right to counsel; Article 6, ECHR|
|Aberdeen City Council v Stewart Milne Group Ltd|| UKSC 56||7 December 2011||Land law|
|Russell v Transocean International Resources Ltd|| UKSC 57||7 December 2011||Working Time Regulations 1998|
|Edwards v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust|| UKSC 58||14 December 2011||Employment law|
|R v Gnango|| UKSC 59||14 December 2011||Criminal law|
|Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Payne|| UKSC 60||14 December 2011||Insolvency law|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd|| UKSC 1||8 February 2012||Jurisdiction; Employment law|
|Rabone v Pennine Care NHS Trust|| UKSC 2||8 February 2012||Article 2, ECHR|
|Re. Stanford International Bank Ltd v Director of the Serious Fraus Office|| UKSC 3||15 February 2012||Restraint order|
|Sugar v British Broadcasting Corporation|| UKSC 4||15 February 2012||Freedom of information|
|Re Peacock|| UKSC 5||22 February 2012||Proceeds of Crime Act 2002|
|Re Lehman Brothers International and Re the Insolvency Act 1986|| UKSC 6||29 February 2012||Insolvency law|
|Anderson v Shetland Islands Council|| UKSC 7||29 February 2012||Security for costs|
|W and BB v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 8||7 March 2012||Immigration law|
|Ministry of Defence v AB|| UKSC 9||14 March 2012||Limitation Act 1980|
|Re S (A Child)|| UKSC 10||14 March 2012||Child abduction|
|Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd|| UKSC 11||21 March 2012||Defamation|
|R (ST) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 12||21 March 2012||Immigration law|
|Tesco Stores Ltd v Dundee City Council|| UKSC 13||21 March 2012||Planning law|
|BAI (Run Off) Ltd v Durham (The Trigger Litigation)|| UKSC 14||28 March 2012||Insurance law; Negligence|
|Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police|| UKSC 15||25 April 2012||Labour law||It was a violation of the Equality Act 2010 to require a policeman to have a law degree close to retirement to continue in a similar job.|
|Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes|| UKSC 16||25 April 2012||Labour law||There was no unjustified indirect discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 by a firm having a policy of requiring partners to retire at a certain age, since this enabled young people to advance.|
|Petroleo Brasileiro SA v E.N.E. Kos 1 Ltd|| UKSC 17||2 May 2012||Maritime law|
|Humphreys v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 18||16 May 2012||Tax credit|
|Test Claimants in the Franked Investment Income Group Litigation v Commissioners of Inland Revenue|| UKSC 19||23 May 2012||Corporation tax|
|Lukaszewski v The District Court in Torun, Poland|| UKSC 20||23 May 2012||European Arrest Warrant|
|NJDB v JEG|| UKSC 21||23 May 2012||Family law|
|Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority|| UKSC 22||30 May 2012||European Arrest Warrant|
|R (KM) v Cambridgeshire County Council|| UKSC 23||31 May 2012||Disability law|
|BH v The Lord Advocate|| UKSC 24||20 June 2012||Extradition; Article 8, ECHR|
|HH v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa|| UKSC 25||20 June 2012||European Arrest Warrant|
|Fairclough Homes Ltd v Summers|| UKSC 26||27 June 2012||Criminal law|
|Oracle America Inc (Formerly Sun Microsystems Inc) v M-Tech Data Ltd|| UKSC 27||27 June 2012||Free movement of goods|
|Phillips v Mulcaire|| UKSC 28||4 July 2012||Phone hacking|
|Gow v Grant|| UKSC 29||4 July 2012||Family law|
|ANS v ML|| UKSC 30||11 July 2012||Family law; Article 8, ECHR|
|G Hamilton (Tullochgribban Mains) Ltd v The Highland Council|| UKSC 31||11 July 2012||Planning law|
|R (Munir) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 32||18 July 2012||Immigration law|
|R (Alvi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 33||18 July 2012||Immigration law|
|The Health and Safety Executive v Wolverhampton City Council|| UKSC 34||18 July 2012||Judicial review|
|Perry v Serious Organised Crime Agency|| UKSC 35||25 July 2012||Proceeds of Crime Act 2002|
|T (Children)|| UKSC 36||25 July 2012||Costs|
|Hewage v Grampian Health Board|| UKSC 37||25 July 2012||Employment law|
|RT v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 38||25 July 2012||Immigration law|
|Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council v Hickin|| UKSC 39||25 July 2012||Landlord-tenant law|
|SerVaas Inc v Rafidain Bank|| UKSC 40||17 August 2012||State Immunity Act 1978|
|Day v Hosebay Ltd|| UKSC 41||10 October 2012||Leasehold Reform Act 1967|
|R v Varma|| UKSC 42||10 October 2012||Proceeds of Crime Act 2002|
|British Airways plc v Williams|| UKSC 43||17 October 2012||Employment law|
|Walton v The Scottish Ministers|| UKSC 44||17 October 2012||Planning law|
|BCL Old Co Ltd v BASF plc|| UKSC 45||24 October 2012||Competition law|
|Rubin v Eurofinance SA|| UKSC 46||24 October 2012||Jurisdiction|
|Birmingham City Council v Abdulla|| UKSC 47||24 October 2012||Employment law|
|Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs v Yunus Rahmatullah|| UKSC 48||31 October 2012||Habeas corpus|
|Jessy Saint Prix v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 49||31 October 2012||Employment law|
|Morris v Rae|| UKSC 50||7 November 2012||Contract law|
|R v Waya|| UKSC 51||14 November 2012||Proceeds of Crime Act 2002|
|R (Gujra) v Crown Prosecution Service|| UKSC 52||14 November 2012||Private prosecution|
|Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 - Reference by the Attorney General for England and Wales|| UKSC 53||21 November 2012||Welsh devolution|
|Al-Sirri v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 54||21 November 2012||Immigration law|
|The Rugby Football Union v Consolidated Information Services Ltd (Formerly Viagogo Ltd)|| UKSC 55||21 November 2012||Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union|
|The Catholic Child Welfare Society v Various Claimants and The Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools|| UKSC 56||21 November 2012||Vicarious liability|
|Ruddy v Chief Constable, Strathclyde Police|| UKSC 57||28 November 2012||Article 3, ECHR|
|RM v The Scottish Ministers|| UKSC 58||28 November 2012||Judicial review|
|X v Mid Sussex Citizens Advice Bureau|| UKSC 59||12 December 2012||Employment law|
|Re A (A Child)|| UKSC 60||12 December 2012||Family law|
|Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate|| UKSC 61||12 December 2012||Scottish devolution|
|Kinloch v Her Majesty's Advocate|| UKSC 62||19 December 2012||Article 6, ECHR; Article 8, ECHR|
|Société Générale, London Branch v Geys|| UKSC 63||19 December 2012||Employment law|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|R (Prudential plc) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax|| UKSC 1||23 January 2013||Legal advice privilege|
|Zakrzewski v The Regional Court in Lodz, Poland|| UKSC 2||23 January 2013||European arrest warrant|
|Lloyds TSB Foundation for Scotland v Lloyds Banking Group Plc|| UKSC 3||23 January 2013||Deed law|
|B (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 4||30 January 2013||Sentencing|
|VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp|| UKSC 5||6 February 2013||Company law|
|O'Brien v Ministry of Justice (Formerly the Department for Constitutional Affairs)|| UKSC 6||6 February 2013||Employment law|
|Re Digital Satellite Warranty Cover Ltd v Financial Services Authority|| UKSC 7||13 February 2013||Company law|
|Re L and B (Children)|| UKSC 8||20 February 2013||Family law|
|Re J (Children)|| UKSC 9||20 February 2013||Family law|
|Sharif v The London Borough of Camden|| UKSC 10||20 February 2013||Homelessness law|
|The Financial Services Authority v Sinaloa Gold plc|| UKSC 11||27 February 2013||Financial Services and Markets Act 2000|
|Davies v The Scottish Commission for the Regulation of Care|| UKSC 12||27 February 2013||Care law|
|Joint Administrators of Heritable Bank plc v The Winding-Up Board of Landsbanki Islands HF|| UKSC 13||27 February 2013||Insolvency law|
|Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson|| UKSC 14||6 March 2013||Landlord-tenant law|
|Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Aimia Coalition Loyalty UK Ltd (No 1)|| UKSC 15||13 March 2013||Tax law|
|Schütz (UK) Ltd v Werit (UK) Ltd|| UKSC 16||13 March 2013||Intellectual property law|
|Hayes v Willoughby|| UKSC 17||20 March 2013||Protection from Harassment Act 1997|
|Public Relations Consultants Association Ltd v The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd|| UKSC 18||17 April 2013||Copyright law|
|Jones (by Caldwell) v First Tier Tribunal and Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority|| UKSC 19||17 April 2013||Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority|
|Barts and the London NHS Trust v Verma|| UKSC 20||24 April 2013||Employment law|
|Uprichard v Scottish Ministers|| UKSC 21||24 April 2013||Planning law|
|Salvesen v Riddell|| UKSC 22||24 April 2013||Scottish devolution|
|R (Faulkner) v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 23||1 May 2013||Criminal law|
|WHA Ltd v Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 24||1 May 2013||Tax law|
|R (ClientEarth) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs|| UKSC 25||1 May 2013||Environmental law|
|Futter v The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 26||9 May 2013||Trust law|
|SL v Westminster City Council|| UKSC 27||9 May 2013||Judicial review; National Assistance Act 1948|
|BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd v Neuberger Berman Europe Ltd|| UKSC 28||9 May 2013||Insolvency law|
|The President of the Methodist Conference v Preston|| UKSC 29||15 May 2013||Employment law|
|Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer plc|| UKSC 30||22 May 2013||Company law|
|Vestergaard Frandsen v Bestnet Europe Ltd|| UKSC 31||22 May 2013||Breach of confidence|
|Public Prosecution Service of Northern Ireland v Elliott|| UKSC 32||22 May 2013||Policing and Crime Act 2009|
|Re B (A Child)|| UKSC 33||12 June 2013||Family law|
|Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd|| UKSC 34||12 June 2013||Family law|
|Ust-Kamenogorsk Hydropower Plant JSC v AES Ust-Kamenogorstk Hydropower Plant LLP|| UKSC 35||12 June 2013||Jurisdiction|
|O'Neill No 2 v Her Majesty's Advocate|| UKSC 36||13 June 2013||Article 6, ECHR|
|Apollo Engineering Ltd v James Scott Ltd|| UKSC 37||13 June 2013||Jurisdiction|
|Bank Mellat v Her Majesty's Treasury (No. 1)|| UKSC 38||19 June 2013||Closed material procedures|
|Bank Mellat v Her Majesty's Treasury (No. 2)|| UKSC 39||19 June 2013||Closed material procedures|
|Cusack v London Borough of Harrow|| UKSC 40||19 June 2013||Highways Act 1980|
|Smith v The Ministry of Defence|| UKSC 41||19 June 2013||Jurisdiction; Article 2, ECHR; Negligence|
|Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Aimia Coalition Loyalty UK Ltd (No. 2)|| UKSC 42||20 June 2013||Tax law|
|R v Brown|| UKSC 43||26 June 2013||Criminal law of Northern Ireland|
|Abela v Baadarani|| UKSC 44||26 June 2013||Civil Procedure Rules|
|North v Dumfries and Galloway Council|| UKSC 45||26 June 2013||Employment law|
|Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd|| UKSC 46||3 July 2013||Intellectual property law|
|R (Sturnham) v The Parole Board of England and Wales|| UKSC 47||3 July 2013||Criminal law|
|Kapri v The Lord Advocate representing The Government of the Republic of Albania|| UKSC 48||10 July 2013||Extradition; Article 6, ECHR|
|R (AA) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 49||10 July 2013||Immigration law|
|Benedetti v Sawiris|| UKSC 50||17 July 2013||Unjust enrichment|
|R (New London College Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 51||17 July 2013||Immigration law|
|Re Nortel Companies|| UKSC 52||24 July 2013||Pensions Act 2004, insolvency law|
|R (Modaresi) v Secretary of State for Health|| UKSC 53||24 July 2013||Mental Health Act 1983|
|Daejan Investments Ltd v Benson (No. 2)|| UKSC 54||24 July 2013||Landlord-tenant law|
|South Lanarkshire Council v The Scottish Information Commissioner|| UKSC 55||29 July 2013||Freedom of information|
|R v Hughes|| UKSC 56||31 July 2013||Criminal law|
|Teal Assurance Company Ltd v W R Berkley Insurance Ltd|| UKSC 57||31 July 2013||Professional liability insurance|
|McGraddie v McGraddie|| UKSC 58||31 July 2013||Findings of fact|
|Torfaen County Borough Council v Douglas Willis Ltd|| UKSC 59||31 July 2013||Food Safety Act 1990|
|Re A (Children)|| UKSC 60||9 September 2013||Jurisdiction|
|Osborn v The Parole Board|| UKSC 61||9 October 2013||Article 5, ECHR|
|Secretary of State for the Home Department v Al-Jedda|| UKSC 62||9 October 2013||Immigration law|
|McGeoch v The Lord President of the Council|| UKSC 63||16 October 2013||Prisoner voting|
|R v Gul|| UKSC 64||23 October 2013||Terrorism Act 2000|
|Szepietowski v The National Crime Agency|| UKSC 65||23 October 2013||Proceeds of Crime Act 2002|
|Woodland v Essex County Council|| UKSC 66]||23 October 2013||Tort law||A school was liable for the failure of a swimming instructor contractor to take care of children, even though pupils and parents have no contract with the school.|
|Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James|| UKSC 67||30 October 2013||Medical law|
|R (Reilly) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 68||30 October 2013||Jobseeker's Allowance|
|Cotter v Commissioners For Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs|| UKSC 69||6 November 2013||Tax law|
|The Alexandros T|| UKSC 70||6 November 2013||Jurisdiction; Shipping law|
|Sakalis v Ministry of Justice, Lithuania|| UKSC 71||20 November 2013||European Arrest Warrant|
|Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 72||20 November 2013||Immigration law|
|Bull v Hall|| UKSC 73||27 November 2013||Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations|
|Zoumbas v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 74||27 November 2013||Immigration law|
|Re KL (A Child)|| UKSC 75||4 December 2013||Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction|
|Re an application by Martin Corey for Judicial Review|| UKSC 76||4 December 2013||Northern Irish criminal law|
|R (Hodkin) v Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages|| UKSC 77||11 December 2013||Family law|
|R (Edwards) v Environment Agency (No. 2)|| UKSC 78||11 December 2013||Costs|
|G v Scottish Ministers|| UKSC 79||18 December 2013||Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003|
|West London Mental Health NHS Trust v Chhabra|| UKSC 80||18 December 2013||Patient confidentiality; Employment law|
|AA (Somalia) v Entry Clearance Officer (Addis Ababa)|| UKSC 81||18 December 2013||Immigration law|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|Re LC (Children)|| UKSC 1||15 January 2014||Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction|
|Marley v Rawlings|| UKSC 2||22 January 2014||Wills|
|R (HS2 Action Alliance Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport|| UKSC 3||22 January 2014||Judicial review|
|Re an application of Raymond Brownlee for Judicial Review|| UKSC 4||5 February 2014||Legal aid|
|R v Mackle (Nos. 1, 2 and 3), and R v McLaughlin|| UKSC 5||29 January 2014||Evasion of customs duty|
|I.A. v The Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 6||29 January 2014||Immigration law|
|Adamson v Paddico (267) Ltd|| UKSC 7||5 February 2014||Village greens|
|Richardson v DPP|| UKSC 8||5 February 2014||Criminal law|
|Cramaso LLP v Ogilvie-Grant, Earl of Seafield|| UKSC 9||12 February 2014||Delict|
|Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria|| UKSC 10||19 February 2014||Trusts; Fraud; Jurisdiction|
|Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer plc|| UKSC 11||19 February 2014||Corporate tax|
|R (EM (Eritrea)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 12||19 February 2014||Immigration law; Article 3, ECHR|
|Coventry v Lawrence|| UKSC 13||26 February 2014||Legal Expenses Insurance; Article 6, ECHR|
|Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Forde and McHugh Ltd|| UKSC 14||26 February 2014||National Insurance|
|Stott v Thomas Cook Tour Operators Ltd|| UKSC 15||5 March 2014||Montreal Convention|
|Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Secret Hotels2 Ltd (formerly Med Hotels Ltd)|| UKSC 16||5 March 2014||Value Added Tax|
|R (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis|| UKSC 17||12 March 2014||Secret trial|
|Dunhill v Burgin|| UKSC 18||12 March 2014||Negligence|
|P v v Cheshire West and Chester Council|| UKSC 19||19 March 2014||Mental Capacity Act 2005|
|Kennedy v The Charity Commission|| UKSC 20||26 March 2014||Freedom of information|
|Durkin v DSG Retail Ltd|| UKSC 21||26 March 2014||Consumer protection law|
|Cox v Ergo Versicherung AG (formerly known as Victoria)|| UKSC 22||2 April 2014||Jurisdiction|
|R v O'Brien|| UKSC 23||2 April 2014||Extradition Act 2003|
|British Telecommunications plc v Telefónica O2 Ltd|| UKSC 24||9 April 2014||Competition law|
|A v British Broadcasting Corporation|| UKSC 25||8 May 2014||Article 10, ECHR|
|Barnes v The Eastenders Group|| UKSC 26||8 May 2014||Receivership|
|L Batley Pet Products Ltd v North Lanarkshire Councilt|| UKSC 27||8 May 2014||Contract law|
|R (Fitzroy George) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 28||14 May 2014||Immigration law|
|Re K (A Child)|| UKSC 29||15 May 2014||Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction|
|Secretary of State for Home Department v MN and KY|| UKSC 30||21 May 2014||Immigration law|
|R (Barkas) v North Yorkshire County Council|| UKSC 31||21 May 2014||Village green|
|Clyde & Co LLP v Winkelhof|| UKSC 32||21 May 2014||Employment law|
|Khaira v Shergill|| UKSC 33||11 June 2014||Trust law|
|R (Eastenders Cash and Carry plc) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 34||11 June 2014||HM Customs and Excise|
|R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 35||18 June 2014||Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974|
|R v Ahmad|| UKSC 36||18 June 2014||Proceeds of Crime Act 2002|
|R (Nunn) v Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary|| UKSC 37||18 June 2014||Evidence|
|R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice|| UKSC 38||25 June 2014||Assisted suicide|
|R (Whiston) v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 39||2 July 2014||Article 5, ECHR|
|The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v United Utilities Water plc|| UKSC 40||2 July 2014||Water Industry Act 1991|
|Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd|| UKSC 41||2 July 2014||Insolvency law|
|British Telecommunications plc v Telefónica O2 Ltd|| UKSC 42||9 July 2014||Competition law|
|Agricultural Sector (Wales) Bill - Reference by the Attorney General for England and Wales|| UKSC 43||9 July 2014||Devolution in Wales|
|R (Sandiford) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs|| UKSC 44||16 July 2014||Lindsay Sandiford case; Consular assistance|
|FHR European Ventures LLP v Cedar Capital Partners LLC|| UKSC 45||16 July 2014||Duties of a fiduciary|
|Coventry v Lawrence (No. 2)|| UKSC 46||23 July 2014||Injunctions; Article 6, ECHR|
|Hounga v Allen|| UKSC 47||30 July 2014||Employment law|
|David T Morrison & Co Ltd t/a Gael Home Interiors v ICL Plastics Ltd|| UKSC 48||30 July 2014||Delict|
|Healthcare at Home Ltd v The Common Services Agency|| UKSC 49||30 July 2014||Procurement|
|Robertson v Swift|| UKSC 50||9 September 2014||Consumer protection law|
|Marley v Rawlings (Costs)|| UKSC 51||18 September 2014||Costs|
|Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd|| UKSC 52||22 October 2014||Sale and rent back|
|McDonald v National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc|| UKSC 53||22 October 2014||Mesothelioma; Negligence|
|R (Barclay) v Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor|| UKSC 54||22 October 2014||Jurisdiction|
|Les Laboratoires Servier v Apotex Inc|| UKSC 55||29 October 2014||Ex turpi causa|
|R (Moseley) v London Borough of Haringey|| UKSC 56||29 October 2014||Council tax|
|Telchadder v Wickland Holdings Ltd|| UKSC 57||5 November 2014||Occupiers' liability|
|AIB Group (UK) v Mark Redler & Co Solicitors|| UKSC 58||5 November 2014||Breach of trust|
|VB v Westminster Magistrates' Court|| UKSC 59||5 November 2014||Secret trial; Article 6, ECHR|
|R (Lord Carlile of Berriew QC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 60||12 November 2014||Article 10, ECHR|
|Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd|| UKSC 61||12 November 2014||Payment protection insurance|
|R (ZH and CN) v London Borough of Newham and London Borough of Lewisham|| UKSC 62||12 November 2014||Homelessness|
|Sims v Dacorum Borough Council|| UKSC 63||12 November 2014||Landlord-tenant law|
|HRH Prince Abdulaziz Bin Mishal Bin Abdulaziz v Apex Global Management Ltd|| UKSC 64||26 November 2014||Company law|
|Loveridge v Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lambeth|| UKSC 65||3 December 2014||Eviction|
|R (Haney, Kaiyam & Massey) v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 66||10 December 2014||Sentencing; Article 5, ECHR|
|Moohan v The Lord Advocate|| UKSC 67||17 December 2014||Prisoners' voting|
|Greater Glasgow Health Board v Doogan|| UKSC 68||17 December 2014||Abortion; Conscientious objection|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|McGraddie v McGraddie (Costs)|| UKSC 1||28 January 2015||After-the-event insurance|
|Michael v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police|| UKSC 2||28 January 2015||Negligence; Article 2, ECHR|
|Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill - Reference by the Counsel General for Wales|| UKSC 3||9 February 2015||Welsh devolution|
|Sustainable Shetland v The Scottish Ministers|| UKSC 4||9 February 2015||Planning law|
|Jackson v Murray|| UKSC 5||18 February 2015||Contributory negligence|
|R (Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills|| UKSC 6||25 February 2015||Judicial review; European Structural Funds|
|R (Newhaven Port & Properties Ltd) v East Sussex County Council|| UKSC 7||25 February 2015||Village green|
|R (Jamar Brown (Jamaica)) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 8||4 March 2015||Immigration law|
|R (Catt) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis|| UKSC 9||4 March 2015||Data Protection Act 1998; Article 8, ECHR|
|Sea Shepherd UK v Fish & Fish Ltd|| UKSC 10||4 March 2015||Tort|
|Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board|| UKSC 11||11 March 2015||Medical law|
|Tael One Partners Ltd v Morgan Stanley & Co International PLC|| UKSC 12||11 March 2015||Contractual conditions|
|Carlyle v Royal Bank of Scotland PLC|| UKSC 13||11 March 2015||Scottish contract law|
|Wyatt v Vince|| UKSC 14||11 March 2015||Divorce law|
|Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd (formerly Flourish Homes Ltd)|| UKSC 15||11 March 2015||Equality Act 2010; Article 8, ECHR|
|R (SG) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 16||18 March 2015||Welfare Reform Act 2012; Article 14, ECHR|
|Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd|| UKSC 17||18 March 2015||Fatal Accidents Act 1976|
|R (Trail Riders Fellowship) v Dorset County Council|| UKSC 18||18 March 2015||Public rights of way|
|Pham v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 19||25 March 2015||Immigration law|
|Re S (A Child)|| UKSC 20||25 March 2015||Costs|
|R (Evans) v Attorney General|| UKSC 21||26 March 2015||Freedom of Information Act 2000|
|Nzolameso v City of Westminster|| UKSC 22||2 April 2015||Homelessness|
|Jetivia SA v Bilta (UK) Ltd|| UKSC 23||22 April 2015||Insolvency law|
|R v GH|| UKSC 24||22 April 2015||Proceeds of Crime Act 2002|
|R (Hemming) v Westminster City Council|| UKSC 25||29 April 2015||Licensed sex shop|
|University and College Union v The University of Stirling|| UKSC 26||29 April 2015||Redundancy law|
|Trustees of the Olympic Airlines SA Pension and Life Assurance Scheme v Olympic Airlines SA|| UKSC 27||29 April 2015||Pension Protection Fund|
|R (ClientEarth) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs|| UKSC 28||29 April 2015||Environmental law|
|Gaughran v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland|| UKSC 29||13 May 2015||DNA database; Article 8, ECHR|
|Hotak v London Borough of Southwark|| UKSC 30||13 May 2015||Homelessness|
|Starbucks (HK) Ltd v British Sky Broadcasting Group plc|| UKSC 31||13 May 2015||Passing off|
|Rhodes v OPO|| UKSC 32||20 May 2015||Freedom of expression|
|Zurich Insurance PLC UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd|| UKSC 33||20 May 2015||Mesothelioma|
|Haile v London Borough of Waltham Forest|| UKSC 34||20 May 2015||Homelessness|
|AR v RN|| UKSC 35||22 May 2015||Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction|
|Arnold v Britton|| UKSC 36||10 June 2015||Contract law|
|Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Pendragon plc|| UKSC 37||10 June 2015||VAT|
|Aspect Contracts (Asbestos) Ltd v Higgins Construction Plc|| UKSC 38||17 June 2015||Contract law|
|BPE Solicitors v Gabriel|| UKSC 39||17 June 2015||Costs|
|TN and MA (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 40||24 June 2015||Immigration law|
|R (Lumsdon) v Legal Services Board|| UKSC 41||24 June 2015||Judicial review|
|In re JR38|| UKSC 42||1 July 2015||Article 8, ECHR|
|Bunge SA v Nidera BV|| UKSC 43||1 July 2015||Contract law|
|Anson v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 44||1 July 2015||Tax law|
|Edenred (UK Group) Ltd v HM Treasury|| UKSC 45||1 July 2015||Public procurement|
|R (Cornwall Council) v Somerset County Council|| UKSC 46||8 July 2015||National Assistance Act 1948|
|Mathieson v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 47||8 July 2015||Disability Living Allowance, EU law|
|Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v The Rank Group PLC|| UKSC 48||8 July 2015||VAT|
|Beghal v DPP|| UKSC 49||22 July 2015||Terrorism Act 2000|
|Coventry v Lawrence (No. 3)|| UKSC 50||22 July 2015||Costs; Article 6, ECHR|
|Hunt v North Somerset Council|| UKSC 51||22 July 2015||Judicial review|
|R (Champion) v North Norfolk District Council|| UKSC 52||22 July 2015||Planning law; Habitats Directive|
|Woolway v Mazars|| UKSC 53||29 July 2015||Hereditament|
|R (Bourgass) v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 54||29 July 2015||Prison|
|Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Tolley|| UKSC 55||29 July 2015||Disability Living Allowance|
|John Mander Pension Scheme Trustees Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 56||29 July 2015||Pension schemes|
|R (Tigere) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills|| UKSC 57||29 July 2015||Student loans|
|Shahid v Scottish Ministers|| UKSC 58||14 October 2015||Article 3, ECHR; Article 8, ECHR|
|Mandalia v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 59||14 October 2015||Immigration law|
|Sharland v Sharland|| UKSC 60||14 October 2015||Divorce law|
|Gohil v Gohil|| UKSC 61||14 October 2015||Divorce law|
|R v McGeough|| UKSC 62||21 October 2015||Evidence|
|The United States of America v Nolan|| UKSC 63||21 October 2015||Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992|
|JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov|| UKSC 64||21 October 2015||Asset freezing|
|British American Tobacco Denmark A/S v Kazemier Transport BV|| UKSC 65||28 October 2015||Jurisdiction|
|Bank of Cyprus UK Ltd. v Menelaou|| UKSC 66||4 November 2015||Unjust enrichment|
|Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi|| UKSC 67||4 November 2015||Contract law|
|R (on the application of Ali) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 68||18 November 2015||Immigration law|
|Keyu v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs|| UKSC 69||25 November 2015||Judicial review|
|In the matter of J (a child)|| UKSC 70||25 November 2015||Hague Convention on Parental Responsibility and Protection of Children; Jurisdiction|
|Eclairs Group Ltd v JKX Oil & Gas plc|| UKSC 71||2 December 2015||Companies Act 2006|
|Marks and Spencer plc v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd|| UKSC 72||2 December 2015||Contract law|
|R v Harvey|| UKSC 73||16 December 2015||Proceeds of Crime Act 2002|
|Trump International Golf Club Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers|| UKSC 74||16 December 2015||Planning law|
|Société Cooperative De Production Seafrance SA v The Competition and Markets Authority|| UKSC 75||16 December 2015||Mergers and acquisitions|
|R (on the application of Wang Yam) v Central Criminal Court|| UKSC 76||16 December 2015||Evidence|
|Macklin v HM Advocate|| UKSC 77||16 December 2015||Scottish criminal law|
|Thevarajah v Riordan|| UKSC 78||16 December 2015||Debarment|
|R (on the application of Roberts) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis|| UKSC 79||17 December 2015||Stop and search|
|Case name||Citation||Decided||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|Mirga v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 1||27 January||Social security||It was lawful to deny a pregnant Polish woman income support under UK and EU law, and to deny an Iraqi man housing under the Housing Act 1996.|
|R (C) v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 2||27 January||Anonymity|
|Youssef v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs|| UKSC 3||27 January||Asset freezing|
|Re B (A Child)|| UKSC 4||3 February||Jurisdiction; Children Act 1989|
|R v Taylor|| UKSC 5||3 February||Criminal law|
|Kennedy v Cordia (Services) LLP|| UKSC 6||10 February||Tort law||Negligence|
|Shop Direct Group v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 7||17 February||Tax law||VAT|
|R v Jogee|| UKSC 8||18 February||Criminal law||Joint enterprise|
|Knauer v Ministry of Justice|| UKSC 9||24 February||Tort law||Mesothelioma; Damages|
|Cox v Ministry of Justice|| UKSC 10||2 March||Tort law||Vicarious liability|
|Mr A M Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc|| UKSC 11||2 March||Tort law||Vicarious liability|
|PMS International Group Plc v Magmatic Ltd|| UKSC 12||9 March||Intellectual property|
|DB Group Services Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 13||9 March||Tax law|
|Lynn Shellfish Ltd v Loose|| UKSC 14||13 April||Land law||Fishing industry in England|
|In the matter of N (Children)|| UKSC 15||13 April||Conflict of laws||Jurisdiction and Brussels II.|
|R (Nouazli) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 16||20 April||Immigration law|
|Asset Land Investment Plc v The Financial Conduct Authority|| UKSC 17||20 April||Collective investment schemes|
|The Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd|| UKSC 18||20 April||Tort law||The proper scope of compensation under the Riot (Damages) Act 1886 in an insurance policy.|
|R (O) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 19||27 April||False imprisonment|
|NYK Bulkship (Atlantic) NV v Cargill International SA|| UKSC 20||11 May||Maritime law|
|Airtours Holidays Transport Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 21||11 May||Tax law||VAT|
|In the matter of an application by JR55 for Judicial Review|| UKSC 22||11 May||Judicial review|
|PST Energy 7 Shipping LLC v O W Bunker Malta Ltd|| UKSC 23||11 May||Maritime law|
|Eclipse Film Partners No 35 LLP v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 24||11 May||Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007|
|Ministry of Defence v Iraqi Civilians|| UKSC 25||12 May||Civil Code of Iraq|
|PJS v News Group Newspapers|| UKSC 26||19 May||Tort law||Privacy law; Injunctions|
|McBride v Scottish Police Authority|| UKSC 27||15 June||Labour law||Shirley McKie|
|McDonald v McDonald|| UKSC 28||15 June||Land law||ECHR article 8|
|BNY Mellon Corporate Trustee Services Ltd v LBG Capital No. 1 Plc|| UKSC 29||16 June||Banking law|
|Brown v Stonegale Ltd|| UKSC 30||22 June||Company law|
|Taiwo v Olaigbe|| UKSC 31||22 June||Labour law||Equality Act 2010|
|MP (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 32||22 June||Immigration law|
|MS (Uganda) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 33||22 June||Immigration law|
|In the matter of D (A Child)|| UKSC 34||22 June||Family law|
|R (Bancoult (No 2)) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs|| UKSC 35||29 June||British Overseas Territories|
|Goluchowski v District Court in Elblag, Poland|| UKSC 36||29 June||European Arrest Warrant|
|R (Ismail) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 37||6 July||Serving foreign judgments|
|Campbell v Gordon|| UKSC 38||6 July||Labour law||Employers' Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969|
|R (The Public Law Project) v Lord Chancellor|| UKSC 39||13 July||Legal aid|
|Edwards v Kumarasamy|| UKSC 40||13 July||Land law||Landlord–tenant law|
|Amoena (UK) Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 41||13 July||Bras|
|Patel v Mirza|| UKSC 42||20 July||Contract law||Illegality of contracts|
|Willers v Joyce (1)|| UKSC 43||20 July||Tort law||Malicious prosecution|
|Willers v Joyce (2)|| UKSC 44||20 July||Precedent; Judicial Committee of the Privy Council|
|Versloot Dredging BV and another v HDI Gerling Industrie Versicherung AG|| UKSC 45||20 July||Commercial law||Marine insurance|
|Lee-Hirons v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 46||27 July||Mental health law|
|Bailey v Angove's PTY Ltd|| UKSC 47||27 July||Commercial law||Law of agency|
|Hayward v Zurich Insurance Company plc|| UKSC 48||27 July||Tort law||The deceitful misrepresentation of a workplace injury|
|Secretary of State for the Home Department v Franco Vomero (Italy)|| UKSC 49||27 July||Immigration law|
|Hastings Borough Council v Manolete Partners Plc|| UKSC 50||27 July||Hastings Pier|
|The Christian Institute v The Lord Advocate|| UKSC 51||28 July||Constitutional law||ECHR article 8 and reserved matters|
|Moreno v The Motor Insurers' Bureau|| UKSC 52||3 August||Damages|
|MB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 53||10 August||Legal aspects of transgenderism|
|R (Ingenious Media Holdings plc v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs)|| UKSC 54||19 October||Constitutional law||ECHR article 8|
|R v Mitchell|| UKSC 55||19 October||Bad character evidence|
|R (Johnson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 56||19 October||Constitutional law||Human Rights Act 1998|
|Impact Funding Solutions Ltd v AIG Europe Insurance Ltd (formerly known as Chartis Insurance (UK) Ltd)|| UKSC 57||26 October||Contract law|
|R (Rutherford) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 58||9 November||Under-occupancy penalty|
|Makhlouf v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Northern Ireland)|| UKSC 59||16 November||Constitutional law||Criminal deportation and ECHR article 8|
|Hesham Ali (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 60||16 November||Criminal deportation; ECHR Article 8|
|R v Golds|| UKSC 61||30 November||Criminal law||Murder|
|R v Docherty|| UKSC 62||14 December||Sentencing|
|R (Mirza) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 63||14 December||Immigration law|
|Habib Khan v General Pharmaceutical Council|| UKSC 64||14 December||Professional ethics|
|R v Guraj|| UKSC 65||14 December||Confiscation|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|Rahmatullah (No 2) v Ministry of Defence|| UKSC 1||17 January||Crown Proceedings Act 1947|
|Abd Ali Hameed Al-Waheed v Ministry of Defence|| UKSC 2||17 January||Constitutional law||Detention|
|Belhaj v Straw|| UKSC 3||17 January||International law||Act of state doctrine|
|FirstGroup Plc v Paulley|| UKSC 4||18 January||Discrimination law||A bus company's duty to provide wheelchair space under the Equality Act 2010.|
|R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union|| UKSC 5||24 January||Constitutional law||An Act of Parliament, not the Royal Prerogative, was required to send notification under TEU article 50 to negotiate leaving the EU because this would withdraw rights under Acts of Parliament. Decided by 11 judges.|
|Akers v Samba Financial Group|| UKSC 6||1 February||Conflict of laws||Extinguishing of an equitable interest by transferring legal title to a bona fide purchase for value was not a "disposition" of that equitable interest for the purposes of avoidance under the Insolvency Act 1986.|
|DB v Chief Constable of Police Service of Northern Ireland|| UKSC 7||1 February||Constitutional law||Bans on processions in Northern Ireland and ECHR article 11.|
|Re Brewster|| UKSC 8||8 February|
|R (Hicks) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis|| UKSC 9||15 February||Constitutional law|
|R (MM (Lebanon)) v Secretary of State|| UKSC 10||22 February|
|R (Agyarko and Ikuga) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 11||22 February|
|Homes and Communities Agency v JS Bloor (Wilmslow) Ltd|| UKSC 12||22 February|
|AMT Futures Ltd v Marzillier|| UKSC 13||1 March|
|Newbigin (Valuation Officer) v SJ & J Monk|| UKSC 14||1 March|
|EV (A Child), Re (Scotland)|| UKSC 15||1 March|
|IPCO (Nigeria) Ltd v Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation|| UKSC 16||1 March|
|Ilott v The Blue Cross|| UKSC 17||15 March|
|AIG Europe Ltd v Woodman|| UKSC 18||22 March|
|Financial Conduct Authority v Macris|| UKSC 19||22 March|
|Gordon v Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Scotland)|| UKSC 20||22 March|
|BPE Solicitors v Hughes-Holland|| UKSC 21||22 March|
|N v ACCG|| UKSC 22||22 March|
|Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd|| UKSC 23||29 March|
|Wood v Capita Insurance Services Ltd|| UKSC 24||29 March|
|AB v Her Majesty's Advocate|| UKSC 25||5 April|
|Volkswagen Financial Services (UK) Ltd v Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 26||5 April|
|Essop v Home Office (UK Border Agency)|| UKSC 27||5 April||Labour law||A skills test was indirect discrimination, and claimants need not prove why if there is in fact a disparate impact.|
|Isle of Wight Council v Platt|| UKSC 28||6 April|
|Revenue and Customs v The Investment Trust Companies|| UKSC 29||11 April|
|SXH v The Crown Prosecution Service|| UKSC 30||11 April|
|McCann v The State Hospitals Board for Scotland|| UKSC 31||11 April|
|Lowick Rose LLP v Swynson Ltd|| UKSC 32||11 April|
|Times Newspapers Ltd v Flood|| UKSC 33||11 April|
|Nuclear Decommissioning Authority v EnergySolutions EU Ltd|| UKSC 34||11 April|
|Gard Marine and Energy Ltd v China National Chartering Company Ltd|| UKSC 35||10 May|
|Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea|| UKSC 36||10 May|
|Suffolk Coastal District Council v Hopkins Homes Ltd|| UKSC 37||10 May|
|LB Holdings Intermediate 2 Ltd v Lehman Brothers International (Europe)|| UKSC 38||17 May||Insolvency law|
|Hartley v King Edward VI College|| UKSC 39||24 May||Labour law||Wage deductions from striking teachers were unlawful by exceeding the proportion of time on strike.|
|R (Coll) v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 40||24 May|
|R (A and B) v Secretary of State for Health|| UKSC 41||14 June|
|R (Kiarie and Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 42||14 June|
|Globalia Business Travel SAU of Spain v Fulton Shipping Inc of Panama|| UKSC 43||28 June|
|Lord Advocate v Dean|| UKSC 44||28 June|
|RFC 2012 Plc v Advocate General for Scotland|| UKSC 45||5 July|
|O’Brien v Ministry of Justice|| UKSC 46||12 July|
|Walker v Innospec Ltd|| UKSC 47||12 July|
|Eli Lilly v Actavis UK Ltd|| UKSC 48||12 July|
|PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd &|| UKSC 49||19 July|
|R (Hemming (t/a Simply Pleasure)) v Westminster City Council|| UKSC 50||19 July|
|R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor|| UKSC 51||26 July||Constitutional law, Labour law||The Lord Chancellor's Order imposing £1200 fees to bring Employment Tribunal claims violated the rule of law.|
|McDonald v Newton or McDonald|| UKSC 52||26 July|
|Birch v Birch|| UKSC 53||26 July|
|Sadovska v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 54||26 July|
|BPP Holdings Ltd v Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 55||26 July|
|R (Forge Care Homes Ltd) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board|| UKSC 56||2 August|
|Goldtrail Travel Ltd v Onur Air Tasimacilik AS|| UKSC 57||2 August|
|R v M|| UKSC 58||3 August|
|MT Hojgaard AS v EON Climate and Renewables UK Robin Rigg East Ltd|| UKSC 59||3 August|
|Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council|| UKSC 60||18 October|
|Reyes v Al-Malki|| UKSC 61||18 October|
|Benkharbouche v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs|| UKSC 62||18 October||Labour law, International law||There was no state immunity for breach of employment rights.|
|Re Loughlin|| UKSC 63||18 October|
|Taurus Petroleum Limited v State Oil Marketing Company of the Ministry of Oil, Republic of Iraq|| UKSC 64||25 October|
|P v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis|| UKSC 65||25 October|
|Aberdeen City and Shire Strategic Development Planning Authority v Elsick Development Company Limited|| UKSC 66||25 October|
|Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd|| UKSC 67||25 October||Criminal law||The test for fraud is objective.|
|Mitsui & Co Ltd v Beteiligungsgesellschaft LPG Tankerflotte MBH & Co KG|| UKSC 68||25 October|
|Brown v The Parole Board for Scotland|| UKSC 69||1 November|
|Littlewoods Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 70||1 November|
|Michalak v General Medical Council|| UKSC 71||1 November|
|R (C) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 72||1 November|
|R (HC) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 73||15 November|
|R (De Silva) v Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 74||15 November|
|Gordon v Campbell Riddell Breeze Paterson LLP|| UKSC 75||15 November|
|Scotch Whisky Association & Ors v The Lord Advocate|| UKSC 76||15 November|
|Tiuta International Ltd (in liquidation) v De Villiers Surveyors Ltd|| UKSC 77||29 November|
|O'Connor v Bar Standards Board|| UKSC 78||6 December|
|Dover District Council v CPRE Kent|| UKSC 79||6 December|
|Four Seasons Holdings Incorporated v Brownlie|| UKSC 80||19 December|
|R (Black) v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 81||19 December|
|R (Hysaj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 82||21 December|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|R (Haralambous) v Crown Court at St Albans|| UKSC 1||24 January||Constitutional law||Search and seizure|
|R (Gibson) v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 2||24 January||Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980|
|R (Bancoult No 3) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs|| UKSC 3||8 February||Constitutional law|
|Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police|| UKSC 4||8 February||Tort law||Duty of care in English law|
|B (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 5||8 February||Immigration law|
|The Advocate General for Scotland v Romein (Scotland)|| UKSC 6||8 February||Immigration law|
|HM Inspector of Health and Safety v Chevron North Sea Limited (Scotland)|| UKSC 7||8 February||Labour law||Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974|
|In the matter of C (Children)|| UKSC 8||14 February||Family law|
|SM (Algeria) v Entry Clearance Officer, UK Visa Section|| UKSC 9||14 February||Immigration law|
|R (Mott) v Environment Agency|| UKSC 10||14 February||Constitutional law||The Environment Agency had to pay compensation to Mott for restricting his fishing rights under ECHR Prot 1, art 1, on the right to property.|
|Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v DSD|| UKSC 11||14 February||Constitutional law||There was a positive obligation on police under ECHR article 3 to investigate women's allegations of rape against cab driver, John Worboys.|
|Barton v Wright Hassal LLP|| UKSC 12||21 February||Civil procedure||Civil Procedure Rules.|
|Steel v NRAM Ltd (formerly NRAM Plc)|| UKSC 13||28 February||Tort law||Following Hedley Byrne and Caparo it was not reasonable to rely on a statement about a floating charge.|
|Burnden Holdings (UK) Ltd v Fielding|| UKSC 14||28 February||Trust law||Limitation Act 1980.|
|Iceland Foods Ltd v Berry (Valuation Officer)|| UKSC 15||7 March||Tax law||A supermarket's air handling system was not subject to rates under the Local Government Finance Act 1988.|
|Reilly v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council|| UKSC 16||14 March||Labour law||A headteacher was fairly dismissed for failing to disclose a relationship with a child sex offender.|
|Re Maguire|| UKSC 17||21 March||Constitutional law||A criminal defendant was not entitled to be represented by a barrister under ECHR article 6 in a second trial when the barrister was being disciplined by the NI Bar Council.|
|Dryden v Johnson Matthey plc|| UKSC 18||21 March||Tort law||Claimants who were exposed to chlorinated platinum salts, and had a heightened risk of allergy, had suffered an actionable personal injury.|
|JSC BTA Bank v Khrapunov|| UKSC 19||21 March||Tort law||The tort of conspiracy would be committed by attempts to evade a freezing order.|
|Morris-Garner v One Step (Support) Ltd|| UKSC 20||18 April||Contract law||Damages for breach of a restrictive covenant should be measured by the economic value of the right that is breached.|
|Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Ltd v Haven Insurance Company Ltd|| UKSC 21||18 April||Solicitor’s equitable lien.|
|Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood|| UKSC 22||25 April 2018||Labour law||The notice of dismissal was only effective when an employee actually read a letter.|
|R v McCool|| UKSC 23||2 May|
|Rock Advertising Ltd v MWB Business Exchange Centres Ltd|| UKSC 24||16 May||Contract law||An "entire agreement" clause was binding on a business, so its eviction for rent arrears was lawful despite an alleged oral agreement that it could renegotiate.|
|R (Gallaher Group Ltd) v Competition and Markets Authority|| UKSC 25||16 May||Constitutional law||The Office of Fair Trading (now CMA) did not act unlawfully by treating different businesses differently in fulfilling its Competition Act 1998 duties.|
|Navigators Insurance Company Ltd v Atlasnavios-Navegacao LDA|| UKSC 26||22 May||Commercial law||Insurance and war losses.|
|Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion)|| UKSC 27||7 June|
|Cartier International AG v British Telecommunications Plc|| UKSC 28||13 June||Intellectual property|
|Pimlico Plumbers Ltd v Smith|| UKSC 29||13 June||Labour law||A plumber for a firm was a "worker" and entitled to the minimum wage and paid holidays despite a written contract asserting he was "self-employed".|
|Project Blue Ltd v Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 30||13 June||Tax law||Stamp Duty Land Tax|
|JP Whitter (Water Well Engineers) Ltd v Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 31||13 June||Constitutional law, Tax Law||HMRC is not required to take into account the consequences to a tax payer when revoking gross payment status in the Construction Industry Scheme under the Finance Act 2004. In particular revoking gross payment status is not incompatible with Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights.|
|R (Steinfeld and Keidan) v Secretary of State for International Development|| UKSC 32||27 June||Constitutional law, ECHR article 8, ECHR article 14||The provisions of the Civil Partnership Act which only allowed for a civil partnership to be between two persons of the same sex was unlawful as the prohibition of different-sex couples was a breach of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights (prohibition of discrimination) and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to a private and family life).|
|Belhaj v Director of Public Prosecutions|| UKSC 33||4 July||Criminal law, Justice and Security Act 2013||A judicial review of a prosecution amounted to criminal proceedings and therefore a closed material procedure (by which the material is disclosed to the court and a special advocate but not the appellants) could not be used as matter was not a civil procedure for which closed material procedures were specifically provided for under the Justice and Security Act 2013.|
|Goldman Sachs International v Novo Banco SA, Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation Fund and others v Novo Banco SA|| UKSC 34||4 July||Insolvency law, European Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive||A loan of $835m made to Banco Espirito Santo in July 2014 was not transferred to Novo Banco following the failure of the former bank. Whilst the loan was governed by English law the banking reorganization was a matter of Portuguese law and the court was bound to recognize the effect of a decision under Portuguese banking law.|
|Revenue and Customs v Taylor Clark Leisure Plc|| UKSC 35||11 July||Tax law, Value Added Tax||A company was not entitled to the repayment of VAT resulting form a successful reclaim for overpaid VAT from a former member of its VAT group. Instead where VAT had been overpaid by the representative member of the VAT group then only the representative member (or its agent) could make a claim for repayment.|
|R v Sally Lane and John Letts|| UKSC 36||11 July||Terrorism financing Terrorism Act 2000||A couple charged with funding terrorism could be guilty of an offence under section 17 of the Terrorism Act 2000 even if they did not actually suspect that their money would be used for terrorist purposes. The test was whether a reasonable person would have "reasonable cause to suspect" the money would be used for such purposes.|
|Williams v London Borough of Hackney|| UKSC 37||18 July||Children Act 1989, Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights||Section 20 of the Children Act 1989 (which allows a local authority to accommodate a child in need who requires accommodation) does not give local authorities any compulsory powers over parents or their children but the accommodation of children under this section may be lawful until such time as the parents make an unequivocal request for the children to be returned.|
|Mills v Mills|| UKSC 38||18 July||Family law||Maintenance payments due from one former spouse to the other should not be increased where the cost of living of the spouse in receipt of the payments had increased due to a requirement to rents, which arose as a result of financial mismanagement of a lump sum that had previously been paid, which could have been used to acquire a property.|
|Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 39||25 July||Tax law, Advance Corporation Tax, Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988||A credit for underlying foreign tax on portfolio dividends should be calculated by reference to the nominal tax rate of the foreign jurisdiction rather than the tax which was actually paid. Compound interest was not due from HMRC to the taxpayer in respect of tax levied in breach of EU law.|
|James-Bowen & Ors v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis|| UKSC 40||25 July||Negligence||The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis did not owe a duty of care to officers in respect of safeguarding their economic and reputational interest where the Commissioner issue a public apology and was involved in litigation involving a previous arrest made by those officers.|
|Owens v Owens|| UKSC 41||25 July||Family law, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973||Mrs Owens had failed to show that Mr Owns behavior had been sufficiently unreasonable for their marriage to have broken down irretrievably. In the absence of no-fault divorce law in England and Wales the court was therefore not able to grant a divorce to Mrs Owens.|
|R v Mackinlay|| UKSC 42||25 July||Campaign finance, Representation of the People Act 1983||In a pre-trial appeal it was confirmed that property, goods, services or facilities transferred to or provided for the use or benefit of a candidate free of charge or at a discount were not required to be authorised by the candidate in order to be treated as election expenses.|
|Banca Nazionale del Lavoro SPA v Playboy Club London Ltd|| UKSC 43||26 July||Tort law||BNL owed no duty of care to the Playboy Club when BNL gave a reference of creditworthiness to an associated company about a customer who subsequently gambled and lost large amounts of money.|
|Totel Ltd v Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 44||26 July||Tax law||It did not breach the EU law principle of equivalence to require companies pay their VAT before appealing against an assessment for it, even the same rule does not occur for other UK taxes.|
|R (Bashir) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 45||30 July||Immigration Law, United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, Cyprus Act 1960||In an interim judgement it was confirmed that the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees applied to the Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia but did not entitle the respondents to be resettled in the UK. Other matters related to the case were left to be decided in future judgements.|
|An NHS Trust v Y|| UKSC 46||30 July||Constitutional law||It was not necessary to have a court order before withdrawing medical life support, unless there are conflicts of medical or family opinion.|
|R (AR) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police|| UKSC 47||30 July||Human Rights, Human Rights Act 1998, European Convention on Human Rights||The requirement to protect young and vulnerable people outweighed an individuals right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of the ability for a potential employer to obtain an Enhanced Criminal Record Check from the Disclosure and Barring Service and refuse employment as a result of information disclosed in such a check.|
|Re McLaughlin|| UKSC 48||30 August||Constitutional law||The requirement to be married or a civil partner, as opposed to cohabiting, to get benefits when a partner dies was incompatible with ECHR article 14.|
|Lee v Ashers Baking Company Ltd and others|| UKSC 49||10 October||Constitutional law||There was no right to require a baker to write a pro-gay marriage message on a cake, under ECHR article 9 and 10, when the bakers' personal religious views opposed this.|
|Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust|| UKSC 50||10 October||Tort law||The NHS trust breached a duty of care by failing to see a patient promptly at A&E and properly advising on waiting times.|
|Nottingham City Council v Parr|| UKSC 51||10 October||Land law, Housing Act 2004||The Housing Act 2004 allowed for a licence of a house in multiple occupation to limit occupation to a particular class of person (in this case students in full-time education).|
|Warner v Scapa Flow Charters|| UKSC 52||17 October||Commercial law, Limitation Periods||The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 had the effect of suspending the limitation period under the Athens Convention relating to the Carriage of Passengers and their Luggage by Sea. As such, individuals perusing claims in Scotland could have three years to make a claim rather than the two years stated in the Athens Convention.|
|KO (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, IT (Jamaica) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, NS (Sri Lanka) and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Pereira (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)|| UKSC 53||24 October||Immigration law, Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002||Misconduct by parents of a child should not form part of the assessment in determining whether a child should be removed from the UK under immigration law. Such misconduct should also not form part of the assessment as to whether Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights requires that the parent remain in the UK with the child.|
|Dooneen Ltd (t/a McGinness Associates) v Mond|| UKSC 54||31 October||Trust law, Bankruptcy (Scotland) Act 1985||A payment protection insurance claim discovered after a former trustee has made a final dividend will re-vest in the debtor and the termination of the trust has the effect of discharging the debtor and re-investing in the debtor with the trust beneficiaries.|
|Barnardo's v Buckinghamshire|| UKSC 55||7 November||Pensions, Trust Law||The trustees of a pension scheme for the benefit of staff of Barnardo's were not entitled to replace the Retail Price Index with the Consumer Price Index in calculating increases in pension payments. The specific wording of the pension scheme rules prevented such a change from being made.|
|Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Generics (UK) Ltd|| UKSC 56||14 November||Patent Law, Patents Act 1977, European Patent Convention||Patents registered by Warner–Lambert did not meeting the appropriate test for plausibility and where therefore invalid for insufficiency but gave conflicting opinions on a number of other matters of patent law.|
|Regency Villas Title Ltd v Diamond Resorts (Europe) Ltd|| UKSC 57||14 November||Property Law, Easement||Comprehensive rights granted to timeshare owners to use any enjoy sporting facilities (including indoor areas) in an adjacent leisure park satisfied the characteristics of easements and could be enforced by the timeshare owners.|
|Rhuppiah v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 58||14 November||Immigration Law, Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Human Rights Act 1998, Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002||Anyone who, not being a UK citizen, has the right to reside in the UK but does not have the right to do so indefinitely, has a precarious status for the purpose of section 117B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.|
|R (on the application of Stott) v Secretary of State for Justice|| UKSC 59||28 November||Criminal Justice Act 2003, Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights||The extended determinate sentences scheme does not breach Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, read with Article 5. The differing treatment of EDS prisoners in relation to early release is within the scope of Article 14 on the grounds of "other status".|
|Secretary of State for Justice v MM|| UKSC 60||28 November||Mental Health Act 1983, Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights||Where a person is hospitalised on mental health grounds, neither the Secretary of State nor the Mental Health Tribunal are able to impost conditions on discharge which would amount to a deprivation of the patient's liberty.|
|Volcafe Ltd v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores SA|| UK SC 61||5 December||Shipping Law, Hague Rules||Where cargo was shipped in good condition by was discharged damaged the burden of proof was on the carrier to who that it did not beach it obligations under the Hague Rules to take reasonable care of the goods. Where negligence is to be considered then the burden of proof was on the cargo owner to show that the carrier was negligent.|
|S Franses Limited v The Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd|| UKSC 62||5 December||Property Law, Landlord and Tenant Act 1954||A landlord could not oppose the grant of a new tenancy under the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, which allow for new tenancies to be denied on redevelopment grounds, where the works that the landlord intended to carry out have no purpose other than to remove the tenant and would not be done had the tenant left voluntarily.|
|London Borough of Southwark v Transport for London|| UKSC 63||5 December||Property Law||Where roads had been transferred from individual London borough councils to the Greater London Authority under the GLA Roads and Side Roads (Transfer of Property etc) Order 2000, the effect of the order was to include the entire vertical plane (i.e. all the airspace above and the subsoil below the surface of the road).|
|The UK Withdrawal From the European Union (Legal Continuity) (Scotland) Bill - A Reference by the Attorney General and the Advocate General for Scotland|| UKSC 64||13 December||Brexit, Constitutional Law||A bill in the Scottish Parliament which had been drafted as an alternative to the EU Withdrawal Bill was (other than in section of one section) within the jurisdiction of the Scottish Parliament. However, subsequent legislation passes by the Parliament of the United Kingdom rendered a further 21 sections invalid.|
|Williams v The Trustees of Swansea University Pension and Assurance Scheme|| UKSC 65||17 December||Anti-discrimination law Equality Act 2010||An individual with a disability has not suffered any unfavorable treatment where an enhancement to his pension was based on the individual's part-time salary at the time of retirement for ill-health rather than a full-time salary as, when considered overall, his pension terms were more favorable than those of an able bodied person.|
|Welsh Ministers v PJ|| UKSC 66||17 December||Mental Health Act 1983, Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights||Community Treatment Orders under the Mental Health Act 1983 cannot be imposed where effect of the order would be have the effect of a deprivation of liberty contrary to article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.|
|UKI (Kingsway) Limited v Westminster City Council|| UKSC 67||17 December||Property Law, Business Rates, Local Government Finance Act 1988||A "completion notice" issued by Westminster City Council which did not identify the property owner, which was left with owner's agents and was subsequently scanned and emailed to the property owner had been validly served. The Electronic Communications Act 2000 allowed for such noticed to be received by email.|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|Reference by the Attorney General for Northern Ireland of devolution issues to the Supreme Court pursuant to Paragraph 34 of Schedule 10 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998 (No 2)|| UKSC 1||14 January||Devolution in the United Kingdom|
|R (on the application of Hallam) v Secretary of State for Justice and R (on the application of Nealon) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Justice (Respondent)|| UKSC 2||30 January||Criminal Justice||Applicants were not entitled to compensation under section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 for criminal convictions which were subsequently quashed for being unsafe .|
|R (on the application of P) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, R (on the application of P, G and W) (Respondents) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and another (Appellants) and In the matter of an application by Lorraine Gallagher for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)|| UKSC3||30 January||Employment Law||Held that the requirement for spent minor criminal convictions to be disclosed to potential employers under the multiple convictions rules is incompatible with Article 8 ECHR|
|Wells v Devani|| UKSC 4||13 February||Contract Law, Estate Agents Act 1979||A binding contract for the payment of commission had been made between and estate agent and property owner despite the absence of a written contract. Amount of commission reduced as a result of the estate agent breaching s.18 of the Estate Agents Act 1979 requiring certain terms to be explained to a vendor.|
|Perry v Raleys Solicitors|| UKSC 5||13 February||Professional Negligence||In considering whether professional negligence was the cause of a loss where the negligence consisted of a potential lost litigation opportunity it was necessary to consider, on the balance of the probabilities, where such litigation would have been undertaken if non-negligently advised and whether such litigation would have been successful.|
|Cameron v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd|| UKSC 6||20 February||Insurance Law, Road Traffic Act 1988||The Court concluded that a person, who is not just anonymous but cannot be identified, cannot be sued under a pseudonym or description and as such an insurer cannot be held liable for a claim under Part VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988 where the driver of the vehicle involved in the accident cannot be identified.|
|In the matter of an application by Geraldine Finucane for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)|| UKSC 7||27 February||Public inquiry, Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights||It was lawful for the government to have refused to hold a public inquiry into the murder of human rights lawyer but the fact that an appropriate inquiry had not taken place breached Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right to life).|
|Konecny v District Court in Brno-Venkov, Czech Republic|| UKSC 8||27 February||European Arrest Warrant, Extradition Act 2003, Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights||The appeal of an individual against extradition under a European Arrest Warrant was dismissed on the basis that the individual was a convicted person despite having an unequivocal right to a retrial after surrender. The court also dismissed that the passage of time prevented extradition under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.|
|In the matter of an application by Hugh Jordan for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)|| UKSC 9||6 March||Human Rights Act 1998 Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights||The court allowed an appeal against a stay on the award of damages under section 8 of the Human Rights Act in respect of a breach of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights confirming that a claim for damages can run concurrently with an inquest.|
|KV (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 10||6 March||Right of asylum Istanbul Protocol||An assessment by a medical expert which referred to the consistency of the clinical findings to the statements by the applicant were not beyond the remit of an expert and were in accordance with the Istanbul Protocol. |
When considering the likelihood that injuries are self inflicted by proxy (SIBP) rather than torture considerable weight should be given to the fact that such injuries which are SIBP are extremely rare.
|Robinson (formerly JR (Jamaica)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 11||13 March||Immigration Law, Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002||A second human rights claim in an immigration case did automatically trigger a right of appeal once the rights to appeal on an original claim had been exhausted.|
|Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Joint Administrators of Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (In Administration)|| UKSC 12||13 March 2019||Tax Law||Statutory interest paid under the Insolvency Rules 2016 is considered to be yearly interest and therefore subject to a deduction of tax at source under the provisions of the Income Tax Act 2007|
|Takhar v Gracefield Developments Limited|| UKSC 13||20 March 2019||Fraud||Where on original judgement has been obtained by reason of the fraudulent conduct of a party and an allegation of fraud has not been raised in the original judgement then it is not necessary for the defrauded party to show that the fraud would have been spotted with reasonable diligence in order for the case to proceed to trial.|
|SAE Education Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 14||20 March||Tax Law, VAT, Value Added Tax Act 1994||A commercial provider of university education which did not in itself hold degree awarding powers but collaborated with UK universities to award degrees could be considered to be a "college of a university" for the purpose of exemption from VAT.|
|Actavis Group PTC EHF v ICOS Corporation and another|| UKSC 15||27 March||Patent Law, Patents Act 1977, European Patent Convention||The Court of Appeal was within its powers to interfere with the decision in the High Court in assessing whether dosage testing was obvious and therefore the patent was invalid for lack of an inventive test.|
|R&S Pilling t/a Phoenix Engineering v UK Insurance Ltd|| UKSC 16||27 March||Insurance Law, Road Traffic Act 1988||An insurer was not liable for a fire occurring on private land arising from the insured vehicle where the vehicle was not, at the time, being used as a means of transportation. The relevant UK legislation at s.143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 was incompatible with EU law.|
|Stocker v Stocker|| UKSC 17||3 April||English defamation law, Defamation Act 1952||An allegation that he "tried to strangle me" on Facebook did not constitute defamation even if the person making the allegation could not demonstrate that he has actually intended to kill her. Context should be given to the nature of spontaneous social media posts when interpreting their meaning.|
|R (on the application of Newby Foods Ltd) v Food Standards Agency|| UKSC 18||3 April||Food Safety||Meat remaining on an animal carcass after it has been mechanically butchered which is subsequently removed from that carcass using a mechanical process was mechanically separated meat under EU law and therefore subject to the specific hygiene requirements of EU regulation no 853/2004.|
|R (on the application of Derry) v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 19]||10 April||Tax Law, Income Tax Act 2007||HM Revenue & Customs has not followed the correct process into raising an inquiry into a claim for share loss relief by the taxpayer and therefore were out of time to challenge the loss relief claimed by the taxpayer.|
|Vedanta Resources PLC and another v Lungowe and other|| UKSC 20||10 April||Company Law, Tort Law||A number of Zambian citizens were entitled to be a group action in the UK courts against Vedanta Resources PLC in respect of alleged harm to the health and farming resources arising from the Nchanga Copper Mine which was operated by a Zambian subsidiary of Vedanta Resources (Konkola Copper Mines).|
|R (on the application of DA) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, R (on the application of DS) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 21||15 May||Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Housing Benefit, Welfare Reform Act 2012||The revised lower benefit cap in respect of eligibility for Housing Benefit did not discriminate against lone parents, or lone parents with children under school age, and was therefore considered to be lawful.|
|R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal|| UKSC 22||15 May||Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, Constitutional Law||By majority decision the court determined that decisions of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal could be subject to judicial review in the High Court and implied that parliament may not use legislation to "oust" the jurisdiction of the courts to undertake judicial review.|
|Telereal Trillium v Hewitt (Valuation Officer)|| UKSC 23||15 May||Business rates in England, Valuation||In considering the rateable value of a premises in a saturated market the valuation hypothesis must assume there remains a willing tenant who is interested in renting the building with the amount of such rent being determined by reference to the general demand derived from similar premises.|
|Hancock and another v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 24||22 May||Tax Law, Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992||The cash redemption of loan notes were the redemption of qualifying corporate bonds and therefore a gain subject to tax under the provisions of the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 was crystallized on the redemption of the bonds.|
|Poole Borough Council v GN (through his litigation friend "The Official Solicitor") and another|| UKSC 25||6 June||Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Children Act 1989||Poole Borough Council had not breached their duty of care in respect of children placed in local authority housing where the children had been subject to harassment and abuse by neighbours. The court found that X v Bedfordshire CC was no longer good law.|
|In the matter of an application by Dennis Hutchings for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)|| UKSC 26||6 June||Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007, non-jury trial||The Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland was entitled to file a certificate under the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007 for a former British Army soldier to be tried in a Diplock court by a judge alone (without a jury) in respect of a killing made by the soldier during the Troubles|
|Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and another|| UKSC 27||12 June||English defamation law, Defamation Act 2013||The court ruled that section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 imposed a new threshold over the common law interpretation of defamation, being that the harm caused had to be serious. It was found that the damage to reputation of the individual in this case did not cause serious harm.|
|Samuels v Birmingham City Council|| UKSC 28||12 June||Housing Benefit, Housing Act 1996||An individual had not made herself intentionally homeless due to failing to pay her rent since her income had been less than her reasonable living expenses when living in her last settled accommodation.|
|Sveriges Angfartygs Assurans Forening (The Swedish Club) v Connect Shipping Inc and another|| UKSC 29||12 June||Insurance Law, Marine Insurance Act 1906||Under the Marine Insurance Act 1906 a ship is a total loss if the costs of repairing the damage exceed the value of the ship. It was held that the costs of repair should include all reasonable costs of salving and safeguarding the ship but would exclude Special Compensation, Protection and Indemnity Clause (SCOPIC) costs.|
|OWD Ltd trading as Birmingham Cash and Carry (In Liquidation) and another v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 30||19 June||Tax Law, Alcohol Duties Liquor Act 1979, Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005||HMRC does not have the power under the Alcohol Duties Liquor Act 1979 or Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 to permit temporary trading in respect of wholesale supplies of alcohol pending an appeal against a refusal to grant approval for such trading under the Alcohol Wholesalers Registration Scheme.|
|Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Gubeladze|| UKSC 31||19 June||Proportionality, Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006, Citizens’ Rights Directive||An individual was entitled to Pension Credit despite having not been registered for three years under the United Kingdom EU Worker Registration Scheme and that the extension to the registration scheme in 2008 was not proportionate as they only gave small and speculative benefits but could have substantial and series effects on individuals.|
|Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd|| UKSC 32||3 July||Employment Law. Restrictive Covenants||A restrictive covenant in an employment contract which prevented the employee from holding any shareholding (of any size) in a competitor following cessation of employment was too broad and was therefore unenforceable. This part of the clause was required to be severed from the covenants.|
|London Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government|| UKSC 33||3 July||Planning Law, Town and Country Planning Act 1990||Where planning permission had been granted for retail development subject to restrictions and a subsequent application was made to modify or remove an existing restriction then, even if the subsequent planning permission does not include specific restrictions, this does not necessarily mean there are no restrictions.|
|Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v MM|| UKSC 34||18 July||Welfare Reform Act 2012, Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2013||A benefit claimed was entitled to claim personal independence payment partly on the basis that they needed support to engage with other people because of mental health problems. The government's narrow and technical view of the scope of the regulations was rejected.|
|Secretary of State for the Home Department v Franco Vomero (Italy)|| UKSC 35||24 July||Citizens’ Rights Directive, Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006||An individual had not acquire ad right of permanent residence and was prevented from acquiring such a right following the adoption of the Citizens’ Rights Directive by virtue of serious criminal convictions. (Following referral of questions to the European Court of Justice).|
|R (on the application of Association of Independent Meat Suppliers and another) v Food Standards Agency|| UKSC 36||24 July||Food Safety, Food Safety Act 1990, Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013||The court made no decision and referred two questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union being |
a) Do EU regulations (Nos 854/2004 and 882/2004 preclude certain procedures undertaken pursuant to the Food Safety Act 1990, and
b) Whether EU regulation 882/2004 mandates a right of appeal against decisions of Official Veterinarians.
|X v Kuoni Travel Ltd|| UKSC 37||24 July||Contract Law, Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992||In respect of whether a tour operator was liable for damages for a breach of contract where a hotel guest was sexually assaulted the court referred the questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union in respect of the application of Council Directive 90/314/EEC.|
|Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring (for and on behalf of Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum UK)|| UKSC 38||29 July||Civil Procedure Rules||A person who is not a party to court proceedings may obtain a number of documents that are held in count during proceedings but does not necessarily have a right to every document. The constitutional principle of open justice may require access to be given to further documents than those that are permitted by right under the Civil Procedure Rules.|
|Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs v Frank A Smart & Son Ltd|| UKSC 39||29 July||Tax Law, The Principal VAT Directive||The taxpayer was entitled to recover input VAT on costs incurred in respect of the purchase of single farm payment entitlements with the key testing on whether recovery was available being how the subsidy was to be used by the business.|
|Akçilv Koza Ltd|| UKSC 40||29 July||Legal Jurisdiction, Brussels I Recast Regulation||The English courts did not have jurisdiction in respect of a claim brought by trustee shareholders of Koza Altın (a Turkish company) over changes made to the constitutional documents of a UK subsidiary. Whether the Turkish parent had acted validly was a matter for the Turkish Courts.|
|R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland|| UKSC 41||24 September||Constitutional law||The Prime Minister's advice to Her Majesty to exercise the prerogative power to prorogue Parliament was unlawful as it prevented Parliament from exercising its constitutional functions, and the resulting prorogation was thus void and of no effect. Decided by 11 judges.|
|In the matter of D (A Child)|| UKSC 42||26 September||Liberty, Children Act 1989, Article 5, ECHR, Article 8, ECHR||Where a 16 or 17 year old lacks capacity to give their own consent, it is not possible for the parents of the individual to give consent to living arrangements which would amount to a deprivation of liberty. Instead an application must be made under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards regime.|
|Routier and another v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 43||16 October||Tax Law Inheritance Tax Act 1984||The restriction in the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 for exemptions of legacies to charities to UK charities violated the EU law principle of the freedom of movement of capital.|
|Gilham v Ministry of Justice|| UKSC 44||16 October||Employment Law, Employment Rights Act 1996, Article 10, ECHR, Article 14, ECHR||A district judge was entitled to whistleblower protections by virtue of being a 'worker' despite not being an employee under the Employment Rights Act 1996. Failure to offer such protection would interfere with the right to freedom of expression, protected under Article 10, ECHR.|
|Shanks v Unilever Plc|| UKSC 45||23 October||Patent Law Patents Act 1977||The system for measuring glucose concentration by an employee of Unilever had provided an outstanding benefit to the company and the employee was entitled to a fair share of that benefit.|
|The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v Vauxhall Motors Ltd (Formerly General Motors UK Ltd)|| UKSC 46||23 October||Property Law, Equitable Relief from Forfeiture||Relief from forfeiture can be given in respect of possessory rights over land where the contract grants either proprietary or possessory rights over land and the termination provision was included in the contract as security of the payment of a sum.|
|Sequent Nominees Ltd (formerly Rotrust Nominees Ltd) v Hautford Ltd (a company registered in the British Virgin Islands)|| UKSC 47||30 October||Property Law, Leasehold Reform Act 1967||A landlord had not unreasonably refused consent for a tenant to apply for planning permission where refusing to grant such consent was an additional safeguard to protect the landlord against the risk of enfranchisement under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967|
|Travelers Insurance Company Ltd v XYZ|| UKSC 48||30 October||Costs in English law, Insurance Law, Senior Courts Act 1981||An insurance company which was not a party to the original case but was the insurer of one of the parties was not liable for costs under section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 where it did not engage in 'unjustified intermeddling'.|
|In the matter of NY (A Child)|| UKSC 49||30 October||Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985||An appeal under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales was set aside.|
|Singularis Holdings Ltd (In Official Liquidation) (A Company Incorporated in the Cayman Islands) v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd|| UKSC 50||30 October||Duty of Care, Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945||A bank which executes a fraudulent instruction to transfer funds out of a company's account can be held as liably for a breach of its duty of care even if the instruction to transfer the money was made by the controlling shareholders and directors of the company.|
|R v Reeves Taylor|| UKSC 51||13 November||Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, Criminal Appeal Act 1968||In order for a person to be guilt of torture under section 134 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 the defendant must be acting in an official capacity for a regime or government and the regime must have some kind of control over the area in which the alleged crime took place.|
|RR v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions|| UKSC 52||13 November||Housing Benefit, Housing Benefit Regulations 2006, Housing Benefit and Universal Credit (Size Criteria) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2017||Housing benefit should be calculated without deduction of the 'bedroom tax'. Following R (Carmichael) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, making such a deduction would be incompatible with Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights and a public authority would be required to disregard a legislative provision where its application would result in a breach of the convention.|
|R (on the application of Wright) v Resilient Energy Severndale Ltd and Forest of Dean District Council|| UKSC 53||20 November||Planning Law, Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004||Local authorities must expressly satisfy the Newbury Principles when granting planning permission. In order for consideration to be 'material' it must be for a planning purpose and not an ulterior purpose and be both fair and reasonable in relation to the development. Upholds the wider principle that planning permission cannot be bought or sold.|
|Edwards on behalf of the Estate of the late Thomas Arthur Watkins v Hugh James Ford Simey Solicitors|| UKSC 54||20 November||Professional Negligence||The Bwllfa principle was not relevant to the after date evidence that had been provided to the court and the case was remitted back to the lower courts to determine the value of the loss of opportunity.|
|Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti|| UKSC 55||27 November||Employment Law, Employment Rights Act 1996, Whistleblowing||If an employee is dismissed by virtue of a false reason given to the person responsible for making the dismissal then, even if the person responsible has a genuine belief in the false reason, then the actual reason for dismissal is in face the hidden reason that was not disclosed to the decision maker.|
|R (on the application of Hemmati) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 56||27 November||Illegal immigration, Right of asylum||The policy to detain persons who had sought asylum in another EU State where the claims were referred to an EU State under the Dublin III Regulation under the Immigration Act 1971 failed to comply with the Dublin III Regulation as it lacked adequate certainty and predictability.|
|MacDonald and another v Carnbroe Estates Ltd|| UKSC 57||4 December||Gratuitous alienations on insolvency, Insolvency Act 1986||Where a property had been sold for £550,000 but only £470,000 had been paid and a higher price could have been achieved with a proper marketing process then there had been a gratuitous alienation prior to insolvency. In considering the available remedy, a flexible approach can be taken to take account of the consideration which a bona fide purchaser would have paid.|
|R (on the application of Lancashire County Council) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, R (on the application of NHS Property Services Ltd) v Surrey County Council and another|| UKSC 58||11 December||Property Law, Statutory Incompatibility||The specific public interest contained in the statutory purpose for which the land was actually held outweighed the public interest in registering the land as a town or village green under the Commons Act 2006.|
|Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah|| UKSC 59||16 December||Immigration Law, Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006, Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union||The Zambrano principle applied to allow a parent of a dependent child who was a resident to a non EU member state to reside in the UK as the primary carer of a British citizen but did not provide the same rights for another individual in respect of their elderly parent as there was not a 'relationship of dependency'.|
|Miller v Ministry of Justice|| UKSC 60||16 December||Labour Law, Part-time Work Directive 1997, Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000||Judges who had held one or more appointments as fee-paid part-time judges had been subject to less favourable treatment in respect of the provision of a pension and were entitled to pensions in respect of their former part-time service.|
|Case name||Citation||Date||Legal subject||Summary of decision|
|FMX Foods Merchants Import Export Co Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs|| UKSC 1||29 January||Tax law, Customs Code of the EU||HMRC could issue a post-clearance demand (in respect of customs duty) after the expiry of the normal three year time limit where criminal proceedings were relevant. However, HMRC cannot issue demands unitarily without any time limit as this would be in breach of the fundamental principle of legal certainty under EU law.|
|A Reference by the Attorney General for Northern Ireland of devolution issues to the Supreme Court pursuant to Paragraph 34 of Schedule 10 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998|| UKSC 2||5 February||Devolution in the United Kingdom||Providing postcode lists to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions was not a "devolution issue" or capable of being incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Therefore, the Supreme Court fused to accept the application by the Attorney General for Northern Ireland.|
|R (on the application of Samuel Smith Old Brewery (Tadcaster)) v North Yorkshire County Council|| UKSC 3||5 February||Planning Law, Town and Country Planning Act 1990||Planning permission granted by North Yorkshire County Council for the expansion of a quarry did not breech the National Planning Policy Framework in respect of mineral extraction in the green belt as the "openness" of the green belt would be preserved.|
|R (on the application of Jalloh (Liberia)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 4||12 February||Immigration Law, False Imprisonment||Conditions of bail under the provisions of the Immigration Act 1971 which required an individual who lacked immigration status to stay at home for eight hours a day constituted false imprisonment.|
|Micula v Romania|| UKSC 5||19 February||Arbitration||The English courts how the power to stay execution of an award by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and the UK's enforforcement of obligations under and the ICSID Convention are unaffected by the EU Treaties.|
|In the matter of an application by Deborah McGuinness for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)|| UKSC 6||19 February||Jurisdiction||The supreme court did not have the jurisdiction to hear appeals in respect of when Ulster loyalist Michael Stone can be released from prison.|
|R (on the application of DN (Rwanda)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 7||26 February||Immigration Law, False Imprisonment||An order to detain and individual prior to deportation under the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 was unlawful and the individual could due for damages for false imprisonment.|
|R v Copeland|| UKSC 8||11 March||Explosive Substances Act 1883||By a majority decision, a person was not guilty under section 4(1) of the Explosive Substances Act 1883 where the explosives were being used for experimentation and self-education and did not have an ulterior unlawful purpose.|
|MS (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 9||18 March||Human Trafficking, Modern Slavery||Immigration tribunals can make findings of fact and are not bound by a Home Office decision in determining whether Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights would be breached. The Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings requirements can form part of the positive obligations owed by the State under Article 4 ECHR.|
|Elgizouli v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 10||25 March||Human Rights, Death Penalty, Data Protection Act 2018||A decision by the government to co-operate with US law enforcement over the prosecution was two alleged Islamic State members was unlawful without assurance from the US that the individuals would not face the death penalty.|
|Aspen Underwriting Ltd v Credit Europe Bank NV|| UKSC 11||1 April||Insurance Law, Jurisdiction||The High Court of England and Wales did not have jurisdiction to hear claims relating to fraudulent misrepresentation following the loss of an insured vessel. Since Credit Europe Bank was domiciled in the Netherlands, the case should be heard in the courts of the Netherlands.|
|WM Morrisons Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants|| UKSC 12||1 April||Vicarious Liability, Data Protection||Morrisons were not vicariously liable in respect of actions taken by a vengeful employee who posted the personal data of 100,000 employees online, an action which was in breach of duties imposed the by Data Protection Act 1998.|
|Barclays Bank plc v Various Claimants|| UKSC 13||1 April||Vicarious Liability||Barclays Bank PLC was not vicariously liable for the acts of a self-employed doctor who was engage to carry out medial examinations of its staff and was accused of sexual assault.|
|Whittington Hospital NHS Trust v XX|| UKSC 14||1 April||Tort Law||Damages payable by Whittington Hospital NHS Trust to a women who could not bear children following earlier medical negligence could include the costs of surrogacy through commercial agreements aboard.|
|Zipvit Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 15||1 April||Tax Law, Value Added Tax||The court referred a case relating to whether a trader can deduct input VAT in the absence of a VAT invoice and whether a trader has an entitlement to deduct VAT on supplies which are carried out by another entity to the Court of Justice of the European Union|
|R (on the application of Palestine Solidarity Campaign Ltd and another) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government|| UKSC 16||29 April||Pensions, Public Service Pensions Act 2013||Ministerial guidance to administering authorities of Local Government Pension Scheme funds on how to discharge their investment powers was unlawful as the Public Service Pensions Act 2013 did now allow central government to impose policy on administering authorities.|
|AM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department|| UKSC 17||29 April||Criminal deportation, Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights||The deportation of an individual who had come to the UK as a teenager from Zimbabwe and was subsequently convicted of a number of serious offences was blocked amid concerns his life would be shortened by HIV and suitable medical care was not available in Zimbabwe. This upheld the position established in Paposhvili v Belgium.|
|Duval v 11-13 Randolph Crescent Ltd|| UKSC 18||6 May||Property Law||A landlord was in breach of its obligations to enforce tenant covenants where the landlord had granted a licence to a tenant to undertake structural works as the granting of such a licence had put the landlord out of its power to enforce an absolute covenant preventing structural works.|
|R v Adams (Northern Ireland)|| UKSC 19||13 May||Unlawful Detention, Detention of Terrorists (Northern Ireland) Order 1972||The detention of Gerry Adams for his attempts to escape from the Maze Prison in the 1970s was unlawful as the custody order had not been authorised personally by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and therefore did not meet the requirements of the Detention of Terrorists (Northern Ireland) Order 1972.|
|Dill v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and another|| UKSC 20||20 May||Property Law, Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990||The status of two lead urns placed on limestone plinths which had been classified as listed buildings were able to be revisited by a planning inspector in considering whether or not they were in face 'buildings'.|
|Cardtronics UK Ltd v Sykes (Valuation Officers)|| UKSC 21||20 May||Property Law, Business Rates||Cash machines located inside and outside of retail stores were not separate hereditaments from the stores or shops and as such should not have been subject to separate business rates on top of normal store rates.|
|Fowler v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs|| UKSC 22||20 May||Tax Law||Despite the presence of a deeming provision in the Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005 which treated a deep-sea diver as being self-employed for UK tax purposes, the actual relationship was that of employment and the diver should be considered to receive the income in respect of an employment when applying the tax treaty between the UK and South Africa.|
|Serafin v Malkiewicz|| UKSC 23||3 June||Libel||A libel case was overturned after the court found that Justice Robert Jay had not allowed a claim to be properly presented and had harassed and intimidated the claimant and as such the original trial was unfair. A retrial was ordered.|
|Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Visa Europe Services LLC and Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v MasterCard Incorporated|| UKSC 24||19 June||Competition Law, Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union||Interchange fees levied by Visa Inc. and Mastercard infringed Competition Law (namely article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The judgement could have significant implications with potentially billions in damages being due.|
|Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (in liquidation) v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd|| UKSC 25||17 June||Adjudication||Adjudication on the application of a liquidator of a company is not incompatible with the insolvency process and the existence of the insolvency set-off does not result in a claim ceasing to exist. The fact that an adjudication award cannot be enforced immediately does not mean that the adjudication process is futile.|
|ABC v Principal Reporter and another and In the matter of XY|| UKSC 26||18 June||Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011, Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights||It is not a breach of the right to family life for a child's siblings to be denied "relevant person" status (being a person who has had significant involvement in the upbringing of the child and is therefore entitled to be notified of and attend any children's hearing).|
|Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd|| UKSC 27||24 June||Patent Law, European Patent Convention||The claims by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc in respect of patents registered for a new type of genetically modified mouse which included a hybrid version of the gene that produces antibodies was invalid as the patents failed to adhere to the rule of sufficiency (being that documents filed with the patent need to be detailed enough to enable scientifically skilled readers to recreate the invention).|
|HMRC v K E Entertainments Ltd|| UKSC 28||24 June||Tax Law, Value Added Tax, Value Added Tax Regulations 1995||A change in calculating a price apportionment for a bingo promoter between the stake (outside of the scope of VAT) and a participation fee (subject to VAT) did not result in a decrease in the total consideration that enabled the taxpayer to claim a VAT adjustment under the Value Added Tax Regulations 1995.|
|R v Hilton|| UKSC 29||1 July||Proceeds of Crime Act 2002||There is no automatic right for third party with an interest in property to make representations at the first stage confiscation proceedings in respect of that property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 where such representations could be made later at the enforcement stage.|
|Villiers v Villiers|| UKSC 30||1 July||Jurisdiction, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973||A maintenance claim could be pursued in England, where the claimant was now residing, rather than Scotland, despite the fact that the petition for divorce was filed in Scotland and the couple had lived in Scotland for most of their marriage. It was considered that the judgement might encourage 'divorce tourism' where differing settlements arise under English Law and Scots Law.|
|Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd|| UKSC 31||15 July||Tort Law, Reflective loss||The reflective loss principle should be strictly limited to cases where claims are brought by a shareholder in respect of a loss suffered by in their capacity as a shareholder and should not apply to claims by creditors.|
|Sutherland v Her Majesty’s Advocate|| UKSC 32||15 July||Human Rights, Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights||A covert investigation by paedophile hunters and the use by authorities of evidence collected from this investigation did not breach an individuals right to a private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.|
Notes and References
- Procedural issue before the main appeal reported at UKSC 15
- This issue was heard by a diminished panel of 3 judges
- An augmented panel of 7 judges sat in this case
- An augmented panel of 9 judges sat in this case
- This was an application made to the court to temporarily suspend the operation of an order made at  UKSC 2
- The court was asked to extend the terms of an anonymity order made at  UKSC 24
- The court made an order regarding the distribution of costs, main judgment at  UKSC 14
- This judgment was simply a clarification of details of an order made in the previous judgement at  UKSC 45
- The Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger also sat in on this case and gave a judgment that formed the unanimous majority.
- Lord Rodger died before judgment was given in this case. He indicated that he would join the majority.
- An augmented panel of 7 judges sat in this case
- Judgment given outside of term time
- Cristofi, Constantine (23 August 2018). "J P Whitter - HMRC not obliged to consider impact of cancellation of Gross Payment Status on business". Reynolds Porter Chamberlain LLP.
- "Civil partnership law incompatible with European Convention on Human Rights, concludes Supreme Court". Hand Morgan & Owen. Retrieved 28 July 2020.
- Clapham, Nicholas (5 July 2018). "The Belhaj finale: Exclusion of closed material procedure means less scrutiny of DPP decisions". UK Human Rights Blog.
- Bridger, Olivia; Bennett, Alan (30 August 2018). "Goldman Sachs International v Novo Banco SA". Ashfords.
- "Repayment Claim (Taylor Clark Leisure)". Mazars. 20 July 2018.
- Bowcott, Owen (11 July 2018). "Supreme court rules against couple charged with funding terrorism". The Guardian.
- MacLynn, louise; Segal, Sharon; Magennis, Olivia (3 August 2018). "Williams v The London Borough of Hackney: Guidance for parents and local authorities on the use of s.20 Children Act 1989". Family Law Week.
- Donneky, Adrienne (2 August 2018). "Mills v Mills: The Supreme Court Judgment and its impact". Hugh James.
- "Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v HMRC – Supreme Court Decision". KPMG. 27 July 2018.
- "Police commissioner owed no duty of care to officers when conducting litigation". Burges Salmon. 2 August 2018.
- Bridger, Lucy (18 February 2019). "Analysis: Owens v Owens - the difficulty in divorce". Family Law by LexisNexis.
- "R v Mackinlay & Ors  UKSC 42". Matrix Chambers. 25 July 2018.
- "Press Summary: R (on the application of Tag Eldin Ramadan Bashir and others) (Respondents) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant)  UKSC 45" (PDF). The Supreme Court. 30 July 2018.
- "Supreme Court Considers Legality of Enhanced Criminal Record Checks". Veale Wasbrough Vizards LLP. 10 August 2018.
- Cummins, Sarah. "Nottingham City Council v Parr: Supreme Court considers HMO suitability and students". Anthony Gold Solicitors.
- Pearce, Gemma (14 November 2018). "Warner v Scapa Flow Charters – The Athens Convention – "Suspension", "Postponement" and "Extension"". Global Insurance Law Connect Limited.
- Metzer, Jonathan (29 October 2018). "Supreme Court rules that parental misconduct irrelevant to whether child should leave UK — an extended look". UK Human Rights Blog.
- "Final means final, but maybe not always". Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland. 6 November 2018.
- "Pensions RPI / CPI: Supreme Court hands down its judgment in the Barnardo's case". Osborne Clarke. 7 November 2018.
- "UK SUPREME COURT CONFIRMS WARNER-LAMBERT PATENT CLAIMS INSUFFICIENT…". Gowling WLG. 21 November 2018.
- Klempa, Markus (27 November 2018). "Introducing a new species of easement: recreational rights". Stevens & Bolton.
- "The Definition of "Precarious" - Precarious No More? The Case of Rhuppiah v SSHD". Richmond Chambers LLP. 15 November 2018.
- "R (Stott) v Secretary of State for Justice". Blackstone Chambers. 30 November 2018.
- RK, Alex (28 November 2018). "Iron logic, coercion and odd outcomes: the Supreme Court decision in MM". Mental Capacity Law and Policy.
- "Volcafe Ltd and others -v- Compania Sub Americana De Vapores SA  UKSC 61". Hill Dickinson. 31 January 2019.
- "Opposing a 1954 Act lease renewal on redevelopment grounds: a firm and settled intention". Simmons & Simmons. 21 December 2018.
- "Councils lose Supreme Court battle with TfL over vesting of highway". Local Government Lawyer. 5 December 2018.
- "Scottish and UK governments clash over Brexit court ruling". BBC News. 13 December 2018.
- Singh, Louise (30 January 2019). "Disability discrimination: what counts as 'unfavourable' treatment?". Weightmans.
- Weatherill, Gill; Kingston, Helen; Woods, Sarah; Nichols, Matthew (18 December 2018). "CTOs and Deprivation of Liberty - Supreme Court Decides". DAC Beachcroft.
- "Have you been served? An update on valid service of local authority completion notices for ratings liability (and beyond?)". Dentons. 8 January 2019.
- "Supreme Court Press Summary - R (on the application of Hallam) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Justice (Respondent) R (on the application of Nealon) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Justice (Respondent)  UKSC 2" (PDF). 30 January 2019.
- "Criminal disclosures: Supreme Court declares multiple conviction rule incompatible with Article 8 ECHR". Bird & Bird. January 2019.
- "Case Comment: Wells v Devani  UKSC 4". UK Supreme Court Blog. 24 April 2019.
- "PRESS SUMMARY Perry (Respondent) v Raleys Solicitors (Appellant)" (PDF). UK Supreme Court. 13 February 2019.
- "Supreme Court guidance on loss of a chance claims - Perry v Raleys Solicitors". CMS Legal. 28 February 2019.
- Hayes, Saksie (21 May 2019). "Case Comment: Cameron v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd  UKSC 6". UK Supreme Court Blog.
- Molloy, Sean (6 March 2019). "A Note on: In the Matter of an Application by Geraldine Finucane for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland)". UK Constitutional Law Association.
- "New Judgment: Konecny v District Court Czech Republic  UKSC 8". UK Supreme Court Blog. 27 February 2019.
- Hamill, Rob. "In the matter of an application by Hugh Jordan for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) ". Justice.org.
- Philps, Carherine. "KV (Sri Lanka) (Appellant) Secretary Of State For The Home Department (Respondent)  UKSC 10". One Pump Court.
- Khan, Asad (18 April 2019). "Second Human Rights Claim Does Not Automatically Trigger Right Of Appeal Says Supreme Court". UK Supreme Court Blog.
- "HMRC v Joint Administrators of Lehman Brothers International". Tax Journal. 20 March 2019.
- Cross, Michael (20 March 2019). "Supreme Court allows 'reasonable diligence' appeal in fraud claim". The Law Society Gazette.
- "Outside education supplier can be a 'college' of a university". The Sunday Times. 4 April 2019.
- "Actavis Group PTC EHF v ICOS Corporation". Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases, Volume 136, Issue 4, April 2019, Pages 223–262. Oxford University Press. 16 December 2019.
- Baker, Andrew (28 March 2019). "R&S Pilling v UK Insurance Limited: Supreme Court Judgment". Horwich Farrelly.
- Woollcott, Emma (3 April 2019). "Stocker v Stocker: a victory for common sense". Mishcon de Reya.
- "New Judgment: R (Newby Foods Ltd) v Food Standards Agency  UKSC 18". UK Supreme Court Blog. 3 April 2019.
- Wood, Andy (22 July 2019). "Supreme Court in Derry on share loss relief". Taxation.
- "Vedanta Resources Plc & Another v Lungowe & Others - Supreme Court Rules UK Correct Jurisdiction To Bring Claim Against Zambian Subsidiary". Gowling WLG. 17 April 2019.
- "HB Bulletin U2/2019: Supreme Court judgment: DA and Others and DS and Others". Department for Work & Pensions. 23 August 2019.
- Wright, Connor. "R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal and others  UKSC 22". Justice.org. Retrieved 2 June 2020.
- Thornton, Arren (16 May 2019). "Lawbite: No place for the real world in this business rates negotiation". Eversheds Sutherland.
- "Redemption of QCBs crystallised gain rolled over from earlier conversion of non-QCBs (and other QCBs) (Supreme Court)". Practical Law Tax by Thomson Reuters. 24 May 2019.(subscription required)
- "How much comfort can local authorities take from the Supreme Court's decision in Poole Borough Council v GN  UKSC 25?". Brodies. 12 July 2019.
- "Dennis Hutchings: Appeal against Diplock hearing dismissed". BBC News. 6 June 2019.
- Rogerson, John; Daley, Katherine (24 June 2019). "The meaning of "serious harm": the Supreme Court in Lachaux v Independent Print". White & Case.
- Lane, Andy; Lewin, Matt (13 June 2019). "What exactly did the Supreme Court say in Samuels v Birmingham?". Cornerstone Barristers.
- "Sveriges Angfartygs Assurans Forening (The Swedish Club) v Connect Shipping Inc". National University of Singapore. Retrieved 5 June 2020.
- Sloane, Michelle (12 July 2019). "OWD – HMRC unable to permit temporary trading pending appeal". Reynolds Porter Chamberlain LLP.
- "Gubeladze v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions". Brick Court Chambers. 19 June 2019.
- Briant, Helen (4 July 2019). "Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd 2019 UKSC 32". Trowers & Hamlins.
- "London Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State". CMS and Savills. 12 August 2019.
- "Government approach to disability benefit regulations rejected by Supreme Court: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v MM  UKSC 34 (18 July 2019)". Garden Court North Chambers. 19 July 2019.
- "Judgement of Supreme Court in SSHD –v- Vomero". Luqmani Thompson & Partners. Retrieved 7 June 2020.
- "Supreme Court refers important food safety case to the Court of Justice of the European Union". Six Pump Court. 29 July 2019.
- Murray, Chris; Evans, Craig (6 August 2019). "Supreme Court: Questions referred to European Court of Justice on X v Kuoni". Clyde & Co.
- Whitaker, James; Wilson, Kate (31 July 2019). "UK Supreme Court rules on non-party access to documents used in litigation in England & Wales" (PDF). Mayer Brown.
- McGeachy, David. "VAT Update – August 2019". Saffery Champness.
- "Akcil & Ors v Koza Ltd & Anor  UKSC 40". Hardwicke. 22 August 2019.
- "Supreme Court: Suspending Parliament was unlawful, judges rule". BBC News. 24 September 2019.
- Harvey-Sullivan, Rose; Temple-Mabe, Kate (8 June 2020). "IN THE MATTER OF D (A CHILD)  UKSC 42". 7BR.
- "Restriction of IHT exemption to UK charitable trusts violates free movement of capital (Supreme Court)". Practical Law by Thomson Reuters. 16 October 2019.(subscription required)
- Bowcott, Owen (16 October 2019). "UK judge granted whistleblower protection rights". The Guardian.
- Grant, Gregor; Jensen, William (24 October 2019). "Shanks v Unilever, Inventor of Diabetes Testing System Finally Rewarded for his "Outstanding" Contribution". Lexology.
- Hobbs, David (4 November 2019). "Forfeiture and licences – a ground breaking case". Bevan Brittan.
- "The Supreme Court has overturned the Court of Appeal's decision on Sequent Nominees Limited v Hautford Limited". Thomson Snell & Passmore. Retrieved 10 June 2020.
- Beresford, Neil; Wing, Mark (31 October 2019). "Product Liability - XYZ v Travelers Insurance Company Ltd (Supreme Court)". Clyde & Co.
- "New Judgment: In the matter of NY (A Child)  UKSC 49". UK Supreme Court Blog. 30 October 2019.
- Allass, Kate; Mantell, Sally (13 November 2019). "Singularis v Daiwa: first Supreme Court case to uphold a claim for breach of the Quincecare duty of care". Farrer & Co.
- Casciani, Dominic (6 December 2019). "Torture charges against former Liberia leader's ex-wife dismissed". BBC News.
- "RR v Sec. of State for Work & Pensions & Ors (Interveners)  UKSC 52". Field Court Chambers. 23 December 2019.
- "R (ON THE APPLICATION OF WRIGHT) V RESILIENT ENERGY SEVERNDALE LTD AND FOREST OF DEAN DISTRICT COUNCIL  UKSC 53". Addleshaw Goddard. 22 November 2019.
- Aizlewood, Mark; De Cesare, Dean. "Supreme Court considers and fails to apply the benefit of hindsight" (PDF). Carter Perry Bailey.
- "Supreme Court decision in Royal Mail Group Ltd v Jhuti". Simmons & Simmons. 27 November 2019.
- Gilmartin, Charlotte (3 December 2019). "Supreme Court unanimously rules detention of asylum seekers pending removal was unlawful". UK Human Rights Blog.
- LLoyd, James (30 December 2019). "A Supreme change to alienation law? – James Lloyd". The Scotsman.
- "Town and village green law: Supreme Court decision on 'statutory incompatibility'". Burges Salmon. 17 February 2020.
- Shepard, Maria (February 2020). "Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Secretary of State for the Home Department v Shah  UKSC 59" (PDF). Justice.org.
- Cross, Michael (16 December 2019). "Part-time judges win Supreme Court action over pensions". The Law Society Gazette.
- Prytherch, Jack (January 2020). "UK Supreme Court rules that longer time limits for customs duty demands should apply in criminal context". Bird & Bird.
- Connolly, Róise (5 February 2020). "UK Supreme Court: NI Attorney General's application to refer 'devolution issue' refused". Irish Legal News.
- Leeson, Lucy (6 February 2020). "UK's highest court rules in favour of council following dispute with Samuel Smith Brewery over quarry extension". The Yorkshire Post.
- Hill, Stephanie (30 March 2020). "Supreme Court confirms Home Office falsely imprisoned people by imposing unlawful curfews". Leigh Day.
- "UK SUPREME COURT LIFTS STAY OF ENFORCEMENT OF ICSID AWARD". Addleshaw Goddard. 10 March 2020.
- "Michael Stone: Supreme Court will not hear prisoner release case". BBC News. 19 February 2020.
- Wake, Peter (3 March 2020). "Detention and the law – another Supreme Court decision". Weightmans.
- Bowcott, Owen (11 March 2020). "Man's 'experiments' with explosives were lawful, court rules". The Guardian.
- "Supreme Court upholds protections for victims of human trafficking". Clan Child Law. Retrieved 15 June 2020.
- Bowcott, Owen (25 March 2020). "UK cooperation with US over two alleged Isis killers ruled unlawful". The Guardian.
- "UK Supreme Court confirms bank named as loss payee under assignment of insurance policy not bound by exclusive English jurisdiction clause under the Brussels Regulation Recast 1215/2012". Herbert Smith Freehills. 2 June 2020.
- "Morrisons staff lose payout bid in Supreme Court data leak case". BBC News. 1 April 2020.
- Bruce, John; Williams, Hannah (7 April 2020). "Morrisons in the Supreme Court: data breach implications for D&Os". Kennedys Law.
- Fuller, Ceri; Wigan, Zoe; Larter, Hilary (6 April 2020). "Supreme Court holds that Barclays were not vicariously liable for acts of an independent contractor doctor". DAC Beachcroft.
- Bowcott, Owen (1 April 2020). "UK woman wins claim for NHS to pay US surrogacy costs". The Guardian.
- "Zipvit Ltd v HMRC referred to CJEU by UK Supreme Court". Mishcon de Reya. 1 April 2020.
- "Palestine Solidarity Campaign Case: government LGPS guidance unlawful". Burges Salmon. 4 June 2020.
- Casciani, Dominic (29 April 2020). "Deportation of man with HIV to Zimbabwe blocked by UK Supreme Court". BBC News.
- Reynolds, Rachael (21 May 2020). "Duval -v- 11-13 Randolph Crescent Ltd: Beware of Granting Consents in Residential Blocks". DAC Beachcroft.
- Ng, Kate (13 May 2020). "Gerry Adams wins Supreme Court appeal against convictions over prison break bids". The Independent.
- Phull, Karen (28 May 2020). "When is a vase not "a building"? The Supreme Court judgment in Dill". Farrer & Co.
- Croft, Jane; Eley, Jonathan (20 May 2020). "Supermarkets win Supreme Court ruling over cash machine taxes". Financial Times.
- Lawrence, Dominic (22 May 2020). "Deemed to fail: Fowler v HMRC". Charles Russell Speechlys.
- Cross, Michael (3 June 2020). "SC sends 'bullying' judge libel case back for retrial". The Law Society Gazette.
- Croft, Jane (17 June 2020). "Mastercard and Visa face billion-pound payouts after UK court ruling". Financial Times.
- Wright, Amber (22 June 2020). "Supreme Court: adjudication and insolvency". Shoosmiths.
- "Siblings not to be treated as "relevant persons": UKSC". Law Society of Scotland. 18 June 2020.
- McKee, Selina (25 June 2020). "Kymab wins Supreme Court case against Regeneron". PharmaTimes Media Limited.
- "Change of price apportionment calculation following revised HMRC guidance did not decrease consideration for VAT purposes (Supreme Court)". Practical Law Company. 25 June 2020.
- "No automatic right for a person with a property interest to make representations at first stage of confiscation process (Supreme Court)". Practical Law Company. 2 July 2020.
- Croft, Jane (1 July 2020). "UK Supreme Court accused of encouraging 'divorce tourism'". The Financial Times.
- "UK Supreme Court gives boost to creditors: bar on recovery of "reflective loss" relaxed in Sevilleja v Marex Financial Ltd". Dechert. 17 July 2020.
- "Paedophile Mark Sutherland loses human rights court challenge". BBC News. 15 July 2020.