Results: 59

• R (D4) v Secretary of State for the Home Department

  30 Jul 2021 [2021] EWHC 2179 (Admin); [2021] WLR(D) 433, QBD (Chamberlain J)

  26 Jan 2022 [2022] EWCA Civ 33; [2022] QB 508; [2022] 2 WLR 785; [2022] WLR(D) 44, CA (Sir Geoffrey Vos MR, Baker, Whipple LJJ)

  04 Apr 2022 (appn all) [2022] 1 WLR 2388, SC(E) (Lord Hodge DPSC, Lord Leggatt, Lady Rose JJSC)

  Subsequent citations: 5.
  STATUTORY INSTRUMENT — Validity — Whether ultra vires

  NATIONALITY — British citizenship — Deprivation
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  STATUTORY INSTRUMENT — Validity — Whether ultra vires — Secretary of State depriving claimant of British citizenship on national security grounds — Statute requiring person to be given written notice of decision to make deprivation order before order made — Amendment to statutory instrument purporting to permit deemed notice to be given of decision to make deportation order by placing on person’s Home Office file — Whether amendment outwith Secretary of State’s regulation-making powers — Appropriate relief — British Nationality Act 1981 (c 61), ss 40(2)(5), 41(1) — British Nationality (General) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/548), reg 10(4) (as amended by British Nationality (General) (Amendment) Regulations 2018 (SI 2018/851), reg 3)

  NATIONALITY — British citizenship — Deprivation — Secretary of State deciding to make order depriving person of British citizenship — Statute requiring Secretary of State to give written notice of such decision before making order — Amendment to statutory instrument purporting to permit deemed notice to be given of decision by placing notice on person’s Home Office file — Whether amendment ultra vires — British Nationality Act 1981 (c 61), ss 40(2)(5), 41(1)(e) — British Nationality (General) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/548), reg 10(4)

  16 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

• R (Vanriel) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (R (Tumi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department)

  16 Dec 2021 [2021] EWHC 3415 (Admin); [2022] QB 737; [2022] 2 WLR 845; [2022] 3 All ER 1112; [2021] WLR(D) 633, QBD (Bourne J)

  Subsequent citations: 10.
  NATIONALITY — British citizenship — Acquisition
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  NATIONALITY — British citizenship — Acquisition — Claimants coming to United Kingdom as part of Windrush generation but subsequently refused re-entry because of lack of documentation to prove right to remain indefinitely — Claimants subsequently admitted to United Kingdom but refused naturalisation as British citizens on ground not satisfying five-year rule for presence in United Kingdom — Whether five-year rule discriminating against claimants in enjoyment of right to respect for private and family life — Whether five-year rule unjustifiably infringing such right — Whether legislation to be read and given effect compatibly with Convention rights — Whether discretion to disapply five-year rule to be implied — British Nationality Act 1981 (c 61), Sch 1, paras 1(2)(a), 2(1)(a) — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), s 3, Sch 1, Pt I, arts 8, 14

  7 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered

• R v Margelis

  04 Aug 2021 [2021] EWCA Crim 1215; [2022] QB 148; [2021] 3 WLR 1411; [2022] 1 Cr App R 3; [2021] WLR(D) 449, CA (Males LJ, Goose, Cutts JJ)

  CRIME — Explosive substances — “Pyrotechnic effect”
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CRIME — Explosive substances — “Pyrotechnic effect” — Defendant posting parcels containing devices designed to ignite and set fire to address labels — Whether devices “explosive substances” — Whether devices used or manufactured with view to producing “pyrotechnic effect” — Explosives Act 1875 (38 & 39 Vict c 17), s 3 — Explosive Substances Act 1883 (46 & 47 Vict c 3), s 4(1) — Pyrotechnic Articles (Safety) Regulations 2015 (SI 2015/1553), reg 3(1)

  2 Case(s) considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered

  2 Statutes considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered
• R v Lalchan

  27 May 2022 [2022] EWCA Crim 736; [2022] QB 680; [2022] 3 WLR 385; [2022] 2 Cr App R 12; [2022] WLR(D) 235, CA (Lord Burnett of Maldon CJ, Dame Victoria Sharp P, Fulford LJ, Swift J, Sir Nigel Davis)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 7.
  CRIME — Public order — Institution of proceedings
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CRIME — Public order — Institution of proceedings — Defendant charged with acts intended or likely to stir up racial hatred — Statutory prohibition on instituting prosecution without consent of Attorney General — Attorney General’s consent obtained only after conviction — Whether failure to obtain Attorney General’s consent before initiating proceedings rendering proceedings invalid — Public Order Act 1986 (c 64), s 27(1)

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered
• R (Imam) v Croydon London Borough Council (R (Ross) v Birmingham City Council, R (Ahmed) v Birmingham City Council, R (Al-Shameri) v Birmingham City Council, R (Imam) v Croydon London Borough Council, R (Elkundi) v Birmingham City Council)

  26 Mar 2021 [2021] EWHC 739 (Admin); [2021] HLR 44, QBD (Matthew Gullick QC sitting as a deputy High Court judge)

  23 Apr 2021 (sub nom R (Elkundi) v Birmingham City Council) [2021] EWHC 1024 (Admin); [2021] 1 WLR 4031; [2021] WLR(D) 235, QBD (Steyn J)

  04 May 2022 (sub nom R (Elkundi) v Birmingham City Council) [2022] EWCA Civ 601; [2022] QB 604; [2022] 3 WLR 71; [2022] 4 All ER 302; [2022] WLR(D) 198, CA ( Underhill, Peter Jackson, Lewis LJJ)

  13 Dec 2022 (app all) [2023] 1 WLR 710, SC(E) (Lord Reed PSC, Lady Rose, Lord Richards JJSC)

  28 Nov 2023 [2023] UKSC 45; [2025] AC 335; [2023] 3 WLR 1178; [2024] 2 All ER 93, SC(E) (Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Sales, Lord Leggatt, Lord Richards JJSC, Lord Burnett of Maldon)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; 2 neutral; most recently considered: 2024. Subsequent citations: 53.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Homeless persons — Council’s duty

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Homeless persons — Suitability of accommodation
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Homeless persons — Council’s duty

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Homeless persons — Suitability of accommodation — Local housing authority accepting duty to secure that suitable accommodation available for homeless applicants — Authority housing applicants in unsuitable accommodation until suitable accommodation found — Whether authority discharging duty to secure suitable accommodation — Housing Act 1996 (c 52), s 193(2)

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Homeless persons — Suitability of accommodation — Local housing authority accepting duty to secure that suitable accommodation available for homeless applicants — Authority housing applicants in unsuitable accommodation until suitable accommodation found — Whether authority discharging duty to secure suitable accommodation — Whether appropriate to grant mandatory order requiring authority to comply with duty — Housing Act 1996 (c 52), ss 193(2), 206

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT — Homeless persons — Suitability of accommodation — Local housing authority breaching duty to secure that suitable accommodation available for homeless applicant — Whether appropriate to grant mandatory order requiring authority to comply with duty — Housing Act 1996 (c 52), s 193(2)

  12 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered
• Philipp v Barclays Bank UK plc

  18 Jan 2021 [2021] EWHC 10 (Comm); [2021] Bus LR 451; [2021] WLR(D) 60, QBD (Judge Russen QC sitting as a High Court judge)

  14 Mar 2022 [2022] EWCA Civ 318; [2022] QB 578; [2022] 2 WLR 872; [2022] Bus LR 353; [2022] WLR(D) 121, CA (Sir Julian Flaux C, Coulson, Birss LJJ)

  27 Oct 2022 (appn all) [2023] 1 WLR 395; [2023] Bus LR 13, SC(E) (Lord Hodge DPSC, Lord Leggatt, Lady Rose JJSC)

  12 Jul 2023 [2023] UKSC 25; [2024] AC 346; [2023] 3 WLR 284; [2023] Bus LR 1269; [2023] 4 All ER 847; [2024] 1 All ER (Comm) 1; [2023] 2 Lloyd's Rep 125; [2023] WLR(D) 305, SC(E) (Lord Reed PSC, Lord Hodge DPSC, Lord Sales, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt JJSC)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 neutral; most recently considered: 2022. Subsequent citations: 26.
  BANKING — Duty of care — Execution of customer’s orders
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  BANKING — Duty of care — Execution of customer’s orders — Fraudster inducing claimant to make authorised push payments from her account with defendant bank to overseas accounts — Whether bank having duty to protect claimant from consequences of payments willingly made but induced by fraud

  BANKING — Duty of care — Execution of customer’s orders — Fraudster inducing customer to instruct bank to make authorised transfer from account — Bank under duty not to execute instruction when on inquiry that execution might result in misappropriation of customer’s funds — Whether duty only arising where instruction given by customer’s agent — Whether bank arguably in breach of duty owed to customer

  BANKING — Duty of care — Execution of customer’s orders — Fraudster inducing customer to instruct bank to make transfer from account — Whether bank under duty not to execute customer’s instruction if on inquiry that execution could result in misappropriation of customer’s funds — Whether such duty only arising where instruction given by customer’s agent — Whether bank arguably in breach of duty owed to customer

  9 Case(s) considered
• Dynasty Co for Oil and Gas Trading Ltd v Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq

  23 Apr 2021 [2021] EWHC 952 (Comm); [2022] QB 246; [2021] 3 WLR 1095; [2021] 2 Lloyd's Rep 275; [2021] WLR(D) 237, QBD (Butcher J)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; most recently considered: 2022. Subsequent citations: 14.
  INTERNATIONAL LAW — State immunity — Act of state
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  INTERNATIONAL LAW — State immunity — Act of state — Claim against minister of constituent territory of foreign state — Whether minister having immunity to claim — Whether relevant acts done in exercise of sovereign authority — State Immunity Act 1978 (c 33), s 14

  3 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered
• Skatteforvaltningen v Solo Capital Partners LLP

  27 Apr 2021 [2021] EWHC 974 (Comm); [2021] 1 WLR 4237; [2021] STC 2395; [2021] WLR(D) 246, QBD (Andrew Baker J)

  25 Feb 2022 [2022] EWCA Civ 234; [2022] QB 772; [2022] 3 WLR 397; [2022] 2 All ER 563; [2022] STC 497; [2022] WLR(D) 107, CA (Sir Julian Flaux C, Phillips, Stuart-Smith LJJ)

  28 Oct 2022 (appn all) [2023] 1 WLR 481, SC(E) ( Lord Hodge DPSC, Lord Leggatt, Lady Rose JJSC)

  08 Nov 2023 [2023] UKSC 40; [2024] AC 539; [2023] 3 WLR 886; [2024] 1 All ER 939; [2023] STC 1875; [2023] WLR(D) 470, SC(E) (Lord Hodge DPSC, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Briggs, Lord Hamblen, Lord Richards JJSC)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 neutral; most recently considered: 2025. Subsequent citations: 18.
  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign revenue laws — Jurisdiction to enforce

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign revenue law — Enforcement of
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign revenue laws — Jurisdiction to enforce — Foreign tax authority bringing private law claims against taxpayers in relation to wrongful tax refunds — Whether claims inadmissible as actions for enforcement of revenue laws of foreign state — Whether proceedings “civil and commercial matter” under European Regulation or Convention — Whether, if so, claims admissible — Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, art 1(1) — Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (2007), art 1(1)

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign revenue law — Enforcement of — Foreign tax authority bringing claims to recover monies wrongfully paid out as tax refunds — Authority claiming that defendants fraudulently or negligently misrepresenting that refund due when no tax ever paid or even due — Whether claims inadmissible as actions for enforcement of revenue law of foreign state — Whether claims subject to European Regulation as “civil and commercial matters” — Parliament and Council Regulation (EU)No 1215/2012, art 1(1)

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Foreign revenue law — Enforcement of — Foreign tax authority bringing claims to recover monies wrongfully paid out as tax refunds — Authority claiming that defendants fraudulently or negligently misrepresenting that refund due when no tax ever paid or due — Whether claims inadmissible as actions for enforcement of revenue law of foreign state

  19 Case(s) considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered

  1 EU Enactment considered

  1 International Agreement considered

• Soriano v Forensic News LLC

  15 Jan 2021 [2021] EWHC 56 (QB), QBD (Jay J)

  21 Dec 2021 [2021] EWCA Civ 1952; [2022] QB 533; [2022] 2 WLR 807; [2022] WLR(D) 9, CA (Dame Victoria Sharp P, Elisabeth Laing, Warby LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 21.
  DEFAMATION — Practice — Preliminary issues

  DEFAMATION — Foreign defendant — Jurisdiction
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  DEFAMATION — Practice — Preliminary issues

  DEFAMATION — Foreign defendant — Jurisdiction — Claimant bringing defamation action against defendants domiciled outside United Kingdom in respect of statements published online — Whether England and Wales clearly most appropriate place in which to bring action — Whether and to what extent statute modifying forum conveniens regime — Whether evidential burden on defendant — Whether defendant required to adduce expert evidence about foreign law — Defamation Act 2013 (c 26), s 9

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• Campbell v Advantage Insurance Co Ltd

  14 Aug 2020 [2020] EWHC 2210 (QB); [2021] RTR 19, QBD (Judge Robinson sitting as a High Court judge)

  15 Nov 2021 [2021] EWCA Civ 1698; [2022] QB 354; [2022] 2 WLR 246; [2022] 4 All ER 1007; [2022] RTR 8; [2022] PIQR P6; [2021] WLR(D) 579; The Times, 28 January 2022, CA (Underhill, Baker, Dingemans LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 5.
  NEGLIGENCE — Contributory negligence — Apportionment

  NEGLIGENCE — Contributory negligence — Objective standard
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  NEGLIGENCE — Contributory negligence — Apportionment

  NEGLIGENCE — Contributory negligence — Objective standard — Claimant when drunk allowing himself to be driven by drunk driver — Claimant seriously injured in road traffic accident — Whether claimant guilty of contributory negligence — Whether objective test to be applied to question of contributory negligence — Whether fact that claimant had been drunk at relevant time to be taken into account

  3 Case(s) considered