Click the case name for better results:

Crowter and Another, Rex (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care: CA 25 Nov 2022

The claimant, who suffered Down’s Syndrome, complained that the 1967 Act as amended unlawfully discriminated against her and those like her. Judges: Lord Justice Underhill (Vice-President of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division)) Lady Justice Thirlwall And Lord Justice Peter Jackson Citations: [2022] EWCA Civ 1559 Links: Bailii, Judiciary, Judiciary Summary Statutes: Abortion Act 1967 … Continue reading Crowter and Another, Rex (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care: CA 25 Nov 2022

Crowter and Others, Regina (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health And Social Care: Admn 23 Sep 2021

Foetus has no Established Human Rights The Claimants sought a declaration that section 1(1)(d) of the Abortion Act 1967, as amended, is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’), as well as some other remedies. The claimant had Down’s Syndrome, and complained the readiness to abort foetuses with identified Down’s genes – more … Continue reading Crowter and Others, Regina (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health And Social Care: Admn 23 Sep 2021

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

SC, CB and 8 Children, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Others: SC 9 Jul 2021

The Supreme Court was asked to decide whether the ‘two child limit’, a provision of primary legislation which restricts payment of amounts of subsistence benefit for children to the first two children in a family, is incompatible with the Appellants’ rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. Held:Lord Reed observed that the concept of … Continue reading SC, CB and 8 Children, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Others: SC 9 Jul 2021

Carson and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Mar 2010

(Grand Chamber) The court ruled admissible claims against the United Kingdom by 13 persons entitled to British State pensions for violation of article 14 of the Convention in combination with article 1 of the First Protocol. All the claimants had earned pensions by working in Britain, but had emigrated to South Africa, Australia or Canada … Continue reading Carson and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Mar 2010

Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 17 Jun 2004

The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious faiths. Held: A distinction was to be made between domestic cases involving actions within … Continue reading Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 17 Jun 2004

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994): HL 24 Jul 1997

The defendant stabbed a pregnant woman. The child was born prematurely and died. The attack had been directed at the mother, and the proper offence was manslaughter. Held: The only questions which need to be addressed are (1) whether the act was done intentionally, (2) whether it was unlawful, (3) whether it was also dangerous … Continue reading Attorney-General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994): HL 24 Jul 1997

Boso v Italy: ECHR 5 Sep 2002

The applicant was married. In 1984 his wife, who was pregnant, decided to have an abortion despite his opposition. Her pregnancy was terminated on 10 October 1984.
On 8 November 1984 the applicant brought an action against his wife in the San . .

More Recent Cases

This is a continuation of the list of significant recent cases on our front page. As a most recent case pushes its way to the top, the last on teh front page falls into here. Newest significant cases.