Click the case name for better results:

AC v Berkshire West Primary Care Trust, Equality and Human Rights Commissions intervening: Admn 25 May 2010

The claimant, a male to female transsexual, challenged a decision by the respondent to refuse breast augmentation treatment. The Trust had a policy ‘GRS is a Low Priority treatment due to the limited evidence of clinical effectiveness and is not routinely funded.’ Held: The claim for judicial review failed. There was no general medical concensus … Continue reading AC v Berkshire West Primary Care Trust, Equality and Human Rights Commissions intervening: Admn 25 May 2010

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

Alabaster v Barclays Bank Plc and Another: CA 3 May 2005

The claimant sought increased maternity pay. Before beginning her maternity leave she had been awarded a pay increase, but it was not backdated so as to affect the period upon which the calculation of her average pay was based. The court made a detailed comparison of the regimes for protection under the Employment Rights Act … Continue reading Alabaster v Barclays Bank Plc and Another: CA 3 May 2005

Regina on the Application of Wilkinson v The Commissioners of Inland Revenue: CA 18 Jun 2003

The claimant had not received the same tax allowance following his wife’s death as would have been received by a woman surviving her husband. That law had been declared incompatible with Human Rtights law as discriminatory, but the respondent refused to make good any claim which had not been originally pursued to the European Court, … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Wilkinson v The Commissioners of Inland Revenue: CA 18 Jun 2003

Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate: SC 12 Dec 2012

The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject matters were reserved to the UK Parliament under the 1998 Act. Second that the Act … Continue reading Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate: SC 12 Dec 2012

Wilkinson v Commissioners of Inland Revenue: Admn 14 Feb 2002

The case concerned the differential tax treatment between men and women, which granted to widows a tax allowance that was not granted to widowers. Held: The court made a ‘declaration of incompatibility’ pursuant to section 4. 1(1) of the TMA gives to the Commissioners a wide statutory power to grant concessions to taxpayers which derogate … Continue reading Wilkinson v Commissioners of Inland Revenue: Admn 14 Feb 2002

X, Regina (on the Application of) v Y School: Admn 21 Feb 2007

The court was asked whether a school was entitled to refuse to allow a Muslim girl to wear the niqab full face veil at school. The reasons were ‘first educational factors resulting from a teacher being unable to see the face of the girl with a niqab; second the importance of a uniform policy as … Continue reading X, Regina (on the Application of) v Y School: Admn 21 Feb 2007

L v United Kingdom: ECHR 5 Oct 2004

The claimant had suffered mental illness and threatened to hurt himself. He was taken into hospital as a voluntary patient, but in effect detained compulsorily. He lacked capacity to consent to medical treatment. Held: The holding of a patient informally amounted to a detention, and that detention was unlawful. It made no difference whether the … Continue reading L v United Kingdom: ECHR 5 Oct 2004

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

Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005

Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005

Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG: HL 5 Mar 1975

Statute’s Mischief May be Inspected The House considered limitations upon them in reading statements made in the Houses of Parliament when construing a statute. Held: It is rare that a statute can be properly interpreted without knowing the legislative object. The courts may look outside a statute in order to identify the ‘mischief’ Parliament was … Continue reading Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG: HL 5 Mar 1975

Adam, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Limbuela v Same; Tesema v Same: HL 3 Nov 2005

The applicants had each entered the UK with a view to seeking asylum, but having failed to seek asylum immediately, they had been refused any assistance, were not allowed to work and so had been left destitute. Each had claimed asylum on the day following their arrival. Held: The appeal by the Secretary of State … Continue reading Adam, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Limbuela v Same; Tesema v Same: HL 3 Nov 2005

Regina v London Borough of Barnet ex parte G; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte W; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte A: HL 23 Oct 2003

The applicants sought to oblige the local authority, in compliance with its duties under the 1989 Act, to provide a home for children, and where necessary an accompanying adult. Held: There were four hurdles for the applicants to cross. They must show that their children are children in need within the meaning of section 17(10). … Continue reading Regina v London Borough of Barnet ex parte G; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte W; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte A: HL 23 Oct 2003

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

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

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

Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption … Continue reading Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others: CA 11 Apr 2003

The appellants challenged decisions of the VAT and Duties Tribunal after seizure of their goods, and in particular whether the cases had been criminal or civil cases and following Roth, whether the respondent’s policy had been lawful and proportionate. Held: The present procedure does not involve the criminal courts and the absence of any criminal … Continue reading Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others: CA 11 Apr 2003

King v Great Britain China Centre: CA 1991

The court considered the nature of evidence which will be available to tribunals considering a race discrimination claim. Held: A complainant must prove his or her case on the balance of probabilities, but it is unusual to find direct evidence of racial discrimination, and a case will usually depend on what inferences can properly be … Continue reading King v Great Britain China Centre: CA 1991

A v Hoare; H v Suffolk County Council, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening; X and Y v London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 12 Apr 2006

Each claimant sought damages for a criminal assault for which the defendant was said to be responsible. Each claim was to be out of the six year limitation period. In the first claim, the proposed defendant had since won a substantial sum from the National Lottery. They complained that the Limitation Act gave the court … Continue reading A v Hoare; H v Suffolk County Council, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening; X and Y v London Borough of Wandsworth: CA 12 Apr 2006

McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 6 Jul 2011

The claimant, a former prima ballerina, had suffered injury as she grew old. She came to suffer a condition requiring her to urinate at several points during each night. The respondent had been providing a carer to stay with her each night to provide the assistance neceesary to access the commode. The claimant now appealed … Continue reading McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 6 Jul 2011

Corporate Officer of the House of Commons v The Information Commissioner and others: Admn 16 May 2008

Applicants had sought disclosure of information supplied by members of Parliament in support of expenses claims. The Office appealed against an order from the Commissioner to produce that information, saying that the actions of Parliament are not subject to judicial control or review. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The tribunal had made no error of … Continue reading Corporate Officer of the House of Commons v The Information Commissioner and others: Admn 16 May 2008

Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark: CA 16 Oct 2003

The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the claimant? Held: A finding that a Convention right has been infringed, including a … Continue reading Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark: CA 16 Oct 2003

ZC v Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust: QBD 26 Jul 2019

Defamation/privacy claims against doctors failed The claimant, seeking damages for alleged defamation, now asked for the case to be anonymised. Held: The conditions for anonymisation were not met. The anonymity would be retained temporarily until any time for appeal had passed. As to the defamation allegation (contained in an email: ‘in order to satisfy the … Continue reading ZC v Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust: QBD 26 Jul 2019

A v P (Surrogacy: Parental Order: Death of Applicant): FD 8 Jul 2011

M applied for a parental order under the 2008 Act. The child had been born through a surrogacy arrangement in India, which was lawful there, but would have been unlawful here. The clinic could not guarantee a biological relationship with the child. The father had since died of liver cancer. The court considered whether the … Continue reading A v P (Surrogacy: Parental Order: Death of Applicant): FD 8 Jul 2011

Turley v Unite The Union and Another: QBD 19 Dec 2019

Defamation of Labour MP by Unite and Blogger The claimant now a former MP had alleged that a posting on a website supported by the first defendant was false and defamatory. The posting suggested that the claimant had acted dishonestly in applying online for a category of membership of the union. The defendants pursued defences … Continue reading Turley v Unite The Union and Another: QBD 19 Dec 2019

Swiggs and others v Nagarajan: HL 15 Jul 1999

Bias may not be intentional The applicant claimed that he had been denied appointment to a job with London Regional Transport because he had brought a number of previous race discrimination claims against it or associated companies. An industrial tribunal had upheld his claim of victimisation contrary to section 2(1) of the 1976 Act, finding … Continue reading Swiggs and others v Nagarajan: HL 15 Jul 1999

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

The Rugby Football Union v Consolidated Information Services Ltd: SC 21 Nov 2012

The Union challenged the right of the respondent to resell tickets to international rugby matches. The tickets were subject to a condition rendering it void on any resale at above face value. They said that the respondent had advertised tickets in breach of this condition. The Court considered whether it was appropriate to protect the … Continue reading The Rugby Football Union v Consolidated Information Services Ltd: SC 21 Nov 2012

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex parte Anderson: HL 25 Nov 2002

The appellant had been convicted of double murder. The judge imposed a mandatory life sentence with a minimum recommended term. The Home Secretary had later increased the minimum term under the 1997 Act. The appellant challenged that increase. Held: The increase in the minimum term to be served was an increase in the sentence. A … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex parte Anderson: HL 25 Nov 2002

Regina v Lichniak: HL 25 Nov 2002

The appellants challenged the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment imposed on them on their convictions for murder. They said it was an infringement of their Human Rights, being arbitrary and disproportionate. Held: The case followed on where the Anderson case left off. In these cases the judge had noted that he did not think the … Continue reading Regina v Lichniak: HL 25 Nov 2002