Click the case name for better results:

Burnip v Birmingham City Council and Another: CA 15 May 2012

The court considered an allegation of discrimination in the application of housing benefit for a disabled person. Held: The claimants had established a prima facie case of discrimination under Article 14 of the ECHR, and that the Secretary of State had failed to establish objective and reasonable justification for the discriminatory effect of the statutory … Continue reading Burnip v Birmingham City Council and Another: CA 15 May 2012

Wylde and Others v Waverley Borough Council: Admn 9 Mar 2017

The claimants challenged the procurement methods of the respondent in acquiring land to support a development. The Court considered their standing to bring such proceedings. Held: Arden LJ’s observations in Chandler (and Richards J’s in Kathro) had not been intended to suggest that anyone who did not have an ‘ulterior’ or ‘improper’ motive would have … Continue reading Wylde and Others v Waverley Borough Council: Admn 9 Mar 2017

SD v Newcastle City Council: UTAA 17 Aug 2010

UTAA The claimant’s appeal to the Upper Tribunal is allowed. The decision of the Newcastle-upon-Tyne First-tier Tribunal dated 30 January 2009 involved an error on a point of law and is set aside. It is appropriate for the Upper Tribunal to re-make the decision on the claimant’s appeal against Newcastle City Council’s decisions dated 8 … Continue reading SD v Newcastle City Council: UTAA 17 Aug 2010

Smithkline Beecham Plc Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others (No 2): CA 23 May 2006

The parties to the action had given cross undertakings to support the grant of an interim injunction. A third party subsequently applied to be joined, and now sought to take advantage of the cross undertakings to claim the losses incurred through the giving of the ‘wrongful undertakings’ Held: The joined party, who had not itself … Continue reading Smithkline Beecham Plc Glaxosmithkline UK Ltd and Another v Apotex Europe Ltd and others (No 2): CA 23 May 2006

Collins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 4 Apr 2006

The claimant had dual Irish and US nationality. He therefore also was a citizen of the EU. He complained that the British rules against payment of job seekers’ allowance were discriminatory. The matter had already been to the ECJ. Held: The residence test as applied was not in contravention of EU law. ‘[T]he proper interpretation … Continue reading Collins v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 4 Apr 2006

BUPA Care Homes v Cann; Spillett v Tesco Stores: EAT 31 Jan 2006

EAT Practice and Procedure – 2002 Act and Pre-Action Requirements; and Amendment Whether section 32(4) EA 2002 – original time limit – restricts time for bringing a DDA claim to the primary 3 months period, or whether the just and equitable discretion under DDA Schedule 3 Part 3 may be exercised. It is the latter. … Continue reading BUPA Care Homes v Cann; Spillett v Tesco Stores: EAT 31 Jan 2006

NSP v Stoke-On-Trent City Council and GP (HB): UTAA 17 Mar 2022

The ‘material fact’ referred to in regulation 101(2)(b) of the Housing Benefit Regulations 2006 is a fact that actually did make a difference to the outcome decision and not one that might have done so. In other words, it is a material fact that either formed, or could have formed, a ground for the revising … Continue reading NSP v Stoke-On-Trent City Council and GP (HB): UTAA 17 Mar 2022

Stec and Others v United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Apr 2006

(Grand Chamber) The claimants said that differences between the sexes in the payment of reduced earning allowances and retirement allowances were sex discrimination. Held: The differences were not infringing sex discrimination. The differences arose from the differences in pensionable ages for men and women introduced in 1940 in order to help remedy severe social inequalities … Continue reading Stec and Others v United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Apr 2006

Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart: HL 26 Nov 1992

Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the cost to the employer, or … Continue reading Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart: HL 26 Nov 1992

Deutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v Inland Revenue and Another: HL 25 Oct 2006

The tax payer had overpaid Advance Corporation Tax under an error of law. It sought repayment. The revenue contended that the claim was time barred. Held: The claim was in restitution, and the limitation period began to run from the date when the claimants discovered their mistake. The appellants had submitted that section 33 of … Continue reading Deutsche Morgan Grenfell Group Plc v Inland Revenue and Another: HL 25 Oct 2006

JM: UTAA 29 Jul 2009

Notional Capital: deprivation Citations: [2009] UKUT 145 (AAC) Links: Bailii Statutes: Income Support (General) Regulations 1987, Housing Benefit Regulations 2006, Council Tax Benefit Regulations 2006 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Benefits Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.375701

In re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G: HL 18 Jun 2008

The applicants complained that as an unmarried couple they had been excluded from consideration as adopters. Held: Northern Ireland legislation had not moved in the same way as it had for other jurisdictions within the UK. The greater commitment to traditional family structures did not however justify the difference. The rules were unlawful discrimination.Lord Hoffmann … Continue reading In re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G: HL 18 Jun 2008

Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others: SC 2 Aug 2017

The court was asked who is legally responsible for paying for the work done by registered nurses in social rather than health care settings. Is the National Health Service responsible for all the work they do or are the social care funders responsible for at least some of it? The local authorities now appealed. The … Continue reading Forge Care Homes Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Cardiff and Vale University Health Board and Others: SC 2 Aug 2017

S, Regina (on the Application of) v A Social Security Commissioner and Others: Admn 3 Sep 2009

The Claimant sought judicial review of a decision of the Defendant Social Security Commissioner refusing the Claimant (and six other appellants) permission to appeal against a decision of a Social Security Appeal Tribunal relating to their housing benefit entitlement. ‘on behalf of’ in the 2006 Regulations was to be given the meaning of ‘in its … Continue reading S, Regina (on the Application of) v A Social Security Commissioner and Others: Admn 3 Sep 2009

Akers and Others v Samba Financial Group: SC 1 Feb 2017

Saad Investments was a Cayman Islands company in liquidation. The liquidator brought an action here, but the defendant sought a stay saying that another forum was clearly more appropriate. Shares in Saudi banks were said to be held in trust for the company, but Saudi law would not recognise such trusts. The shares had been … Continue reading Akers and Others v Samba Financial Group: SC 1 Feb 2017

BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: CA 9 Nov 2007

The action group appealed against refusal of a judicial review of guidelines as to the employment of non-EU doctors, saying that they were in effect immigration rules and issuable only under the 1971 Act. The court had said that since the guidance did not apply to all health services it was principally an employment measure. … Continue reading BAPIO Action Ltd and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: CA 9 Nov 2007

Farrell v Alexander: HL 24 Jun 1976

The House considered the construction of a consolidation Act. Held: It is ordinarily both unnecessary and undesirable to construe a consolidation Act by reference to statutory antecedents, but it is permissible to do so in a case where the consolidation Act is unclear, or cannot be resolved by classical methods of construction. Self-contained statutes, whether … Continue reading Farrell v Alexander: HL 24 Jun 1976

Regina v Soneji and Bullen: HL 21 Jul 2005

The defendants had had confiscation orders made against them. They had appealed on the basis that the orders were made more than six months after sentence. The prosecutor now appealed saying that the fact that the order were not timely did not invalidate them. Held: The appeal was allowed. The confiscation orders made by the … Continue reading Regina v Soneji and Bullen: HL 21 Jul 2005

The United States of America v Nolan: SC 21 Oct 2015

Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed. Held: The appeal failed (Lord Carnworth dissenting). That the exact situation might not have … Continue reading The United States of America v Nolan: SC 21 Oct 2015

MA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 9 Nov 2016

The appellants claimed housing benefit. They appealed against rejection of their claims that the imposition of limits to the maximum sums payable, ‘the bedroom tax’, was unlawful on equality grounds. The claimants either had disabilities, or lived with dependent family with disabilities, or live in what are known as ‘sanctuary scheme’ homes (accommodation specially adapted … Continue reading MA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 9 Nov 2016

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 2001): HL 11 Dec 2003

The house was asked whether it might be correct to stay criminal proceedings as an abuse where for delay. The defendants were prisoners in a prison riot in 1998. The case only came on for trial in 2001, when they submitted that the delay was an abuse. Held: The defendants had a right to a … Continue reading Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 2001): HL 11 Dec 2003

Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

Lumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board: SC 24 Jun 2015

The appellant, barristers and solicitors, challenged the respondent’s approval of alterations to their regulatory arrangements, under Part 3 of Schedule 4 to the 2007 Act. The alterations gave effect to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates providing for the assessment of the performance of criminal advocates in England and Wales by judges. They now appealed … Continue reading Lumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board: SC 24 Jun 2015

Humphreys v Revenue and Customs: SC 16 May 2012

Separated parents shared the care of their child. The father complained that all the Child Tax Credit was given to the mother. Held: The appeal failed. Although the rule does happen to be indirectly discriminatory against fathers, the complaint would be exactly the same if it did not discriminate between the sexes. Mothers who share … Continue reading Humphreys v Revenue and Customs: SC 16 May 2012

Uber Bv and Others v Aslam and Others: SC 19 Feb 2021

Smartphone App Contractors did so as Workers The court was asked whether the employment tribunal was entitled to find that drivers whose work was arranged through Uber’s smartphone application work for Uber under workers’ contracts and so qualify for the national minimum wage, paid annual leave and other workers’ rights; or whether, as Uber contended, … Continue reading Uber Bv and Others v Aslam and Others: SC 19 Feb 2021

SG and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 18 Mar 2015

The court was asked whether it was lawful for the Secretary of State to make subordinate legislation imposing a cap on the amount of welfare benefits which can be received by claimants in non-working households, equivalent to the net median earnings of working households. The challenge was under the 1998 Act on the basis that … Continue reading SG and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 18 Mar 2015

RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 22 Oct 2008

The 1987 Regulations provided additional benefits for disabled persons, but excluded from benefit those who had nowhere to sleep. The claimant said this was irrational. He had been receiving the disability premium to his benefits, but this was cancelled when he lost his home. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The disabilty premium, as part of … Continue reading RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 22 Oct 2008

AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable harm for the purposes of an action of damages for personal injury. Held: The insurers’ appeals failed. … Continue reading AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 5 May 2005

Widowers claimed that, in denying them benefits which would have been payable to widows, the Secretary of State had acted incompatibly with their rights under article 14 read with article 1 of Protocol 1 and article 8 of the ECHR. Held: The Secretary’s appeal succeeded. Section 6 of the 1998 Act permitted the discrimination as … Continue reading Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 5 May 2005

DA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 15 May 2019

Several lone parents challenged the benefits cap, saying that it was discriminatory. Held: (Hale, Kerr LL dissenting) The parents’ appeals failed. The legislation had a clear impact on lone parents and their children. The intention was to encourage claimants back into work. It was said that thus contradicted the other policy of providing no free … Continue reading DA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: SC 15 May 2019

Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills: SC 29 Jul 2015

After increasing university fees, the student loan system was part funded by the government. They introduced limits to the availability of such loans, and a student must have been lawfully ordinarily resident in the UK for three years before the day the academic year begins. The claimant came as a child with her mother some … Continue reading Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills: SC 29 Jul 2015

Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001

Power to call in is administrative in nature The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights to a fair hearing before … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001

Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor: CA 16 Jul 1999

Consultation to be Early and Real Listening The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were in need of … Continue reading Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor: CA 16 Jul 1999

Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999

Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without undertakings from the journalists not to publish any element of the interview. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999

Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999

The applicant had soft tissue injuries around the spine as a consequence of a back injury at work. He was absent from work for a long time as a result of his injuries, and he was eventually dismissed when his medical advisers could provide no clear idea of when it would be possible for him … Continue reading Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999

TD v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames (HB): UTAA 20 Dec 2013

Human rights law – article 10 (freedom of expression) – ‘ This appeal is concerned with the rule in the housing benefit that, in effect, allows a child in what I will term ‘an exactly equal shared care’ situation to count only as the child of one of his parents for housing benefit (and council … Continue reading TD v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames (HB): UTAA 20 Dec 2013

Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy. Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law because it is the antithesis of fairness. It brings the law … Continue reading Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

Stewart v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 29 Jul 2011

The court considered the arrangements for providing public support for the costs of funerals. The claimant’s son had died whilst she was in prison. Assistance had been refused because, as a prisoner, she was not receiving benefits. She complained that the refusal violated her right not to be discriminated against. Held: The prisoner’s appeal failed. … Continue reading Stewart v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 29 Jul 2011

Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005

The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. Held: The appeal was dismissed. For Article 9 to be engaged (aside from certain other threshold conditions) the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005

Marcic v Thames Water Utilities Limited: HL 4 Dec 2003

The claimant’s house was regularly flooded by waters including also foul sewage from the respondent’s neighbouring premises. He sought damages and an injunction. The defendants sought to restrict the claimant to his statutory rights. Held: The damages were restricted to the statutory ones. The defendant was regulated under the 1991 Act by the Director-General, who … Continue reading Marcic v Thames Water Utilities Limited: HL 4 Dec 2003

Pickstone v Freemans Plc: HL 30 Jun 1988

The claimant sought equal pay with other, male, warehouse operatives who were doing work of equal value but for more money. The Court of Appeal had held that since other men were also employed on the same terms both as to pay and work, her claim failed. Held: The claim was not disbarred in this … Continue reading Pickstone v Freemans Plc: HL 30 Jun 1988

Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society: HL 19 Jun 1997

Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside. Held: Investors having once assigned their causes of action to the ICS, could not later … Continue reading Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society: HL 19 Jun 1997

Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd: HL 16 Mar 1989

The twelve applicants had been unfairly dismissed by the transferor immediately before the transfer, and for a reason connected with the transfer under section 8(1). The question was whether the liability for unfair dismissal compensation transferred to the transferee. Held: It is the duty of a UK court to construe a statute, so far as … Continue reading Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd: HL 16 Mar 1989

Gargett, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Lambeth: CA 18 Dec 2008

The applicant was an assured tenant receiving housing benefits. Her rent was increased to a level above what would normally be covered by benefits. She failed to notify the local authority. The court was asked whether local authorities may exercise their power to make Discretionary Housing Payments (DHPs) by paying arrears of rent, if the … Continue reading Gargett, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Lambeth: CA 18 Dec 2008

Brewster, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland): SC 8 Feb 2017

Survivor of unmarried partner entitled to pension The claimant appealed against the rejection of her claim to the survivor’s pension after the death of her longstanding partner, even though they had not been married. The rules said that she had to have been nominated by her partner, but he had not done this. Held: Her … Continue reading Brewster, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland): SC 8 Feb 2017

Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and another, ex parte Spath Holme Limited: HL 7 Dec 2000

The section in the 1985 Act created a power to prevent rent increases for tenancies of dwelling-houses for purposes including the alleviation of perceived hardship. Accordingly the Secretary of State could issue regulations whose effect was to limit the maximum amount of rent in the proper exercise of that discretionary power. The Act as a … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and another, ex parte Spath Holme Limited: HL 7 Dec 2000

Carson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Reynolds v Same: HL 26 May 2005

One claimant said that as a foreign resident pensioner, she had been excluded from the annual uprating of state retirement pension, and that this was an infringement of her human rights. Another complained at the lower levels of job-seeker’s allowance payable to those under 25. Held: (Lord Carswell dissented in part.) The claims failed. The … Continue reading Carson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Reynolds v Same: HL 26 May 2005

Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) v Charity Commission for England and Wales and Another: ChD 17 Mar 2010

The charity appealed against refusal of permission to amend its charitable objects as set out in the memorandum of association. The charity was successful as an adoption agency particularly in placing children who would otherwise have had difficulty finding a home, following the principles of the Roman Catholic Church, and it wanted to restrict its … Continue reading Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) v Charity Commission for England and Wales and Another: ChD 17 Mar 2010

Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners (2): HL 20 Jul 1992

The society had set out to assert that regulations were unlawful in creating a double taxation. It paid money on account of the tax demanded. It won and recovered the sums paid, but the revenue refused to pay any interest accrued on the sums paid. The Society sought to challenge the decision by judicial review. … Continue reading Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners (2): HL 20 Jul 1992

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts