Results: 6

• X v Lord Advocate

  12 Apr 2024 [2024] CSIH 6; 2024 SC 309, Ct of Sess

  10 Dec 2025 [2025] UKSC 44; [2026] 2 WLR 43; [2025] WLR(D) 620, SC(Sc) (Lord Reed PSC, Lord Hodge DPSC, Lord Briggs, Lord Burrows, Lady Simler JJSC)

  CROWN — Liability — Tort or delict
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CROWN — Liability — Tort or delict — Judicial office holder — Alleged assault and harassment of legal practitioner by sheriff — Whether sheriff in relationship “akin to employment” with Crown for purposes of vicarious liability — Whether open to practitioner to bring claim in delict against Scottish Government as representing Crown — Crown Proceedings Act 1947 (c 44), ss 2(1)(a), 40(2)(b), 43(b)

  CROWN — Liability — Tort or delict — Sheriff allegedly assaulting and harassing legal practitioner — Whether Lord Advocate appropriate defender to vicarious liability claim against Crown — Whether Crown vicariously liable for all delicts of its “servants” — Whether sheriff’s relationship with Crown “akin to employment” for purposes of vicarious liability — Crown Proceedings Act 1947 (c 44), ss 2(1)(a), 40(2)(b)

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• Hawkins v Abarbanel Ltd

  02 Dec 2025 [2025] UKPC 58; [2026] 1 WLR 115; [2025] WLR(D) 622, PC (Lord Reed PSC, Lord Hodge DPSC, Lord Burrows, Lord Stephens JJSC, Dame Janice Pereira)

  CONTRACT — Illegality — Enforceability

  PRIVY COUNCIL — Appeal as of right — Leave
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CONTRACT — Illegality — Enforceability — Company carrying on moneylending business in breach of statutory licensing conditions — Whether contract of loan entered into by company unenforceable — Local Companies (Control) Act (2007 rev), ss 2, 4, 5, 11, 23 — Trade and Business Licensing Act (2007 rev), ss 4, 12, 26

  PRIVY COUNCIL — Appeal as of right — Leave — Appeal lying as of right from local Court of Appeal to Judicial Committee — Correct test to be applied by local Court of Appeal or Privy Council when considering whether to grant leave to appeal — Cayman Islands (Appeals to Privy Council) Order 1984 (SI 1984/1151), s 3(1)(a)

  PRIVY COUNCIL — Appeal as of right — Leave — Appeal lying as of right from local Court of Appeal to Privy Council — Correct test to be applied by local Court of Appeal or Privy Council when considering whether to grant leave to appeal — Cayman Islands (Appeals to Privy Council) Order 1984 (SI 1984/1151), s 3(1)(a)

  8 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

  2 Overseas Enactments considered

• Searson v Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire Police

  25 Jul 2025 [2025] EWHC 1982 (KB); [2026] 1 WLR 103; [2025] WLR(D) 416, KBD (Wall J)

  POLICE — Duties — Persons detained
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  POLICE — Duties — Persons detained — Claimants arrested and their detention at police station authorised — Review officer not providing second claimant or solicitor opportunity to make representations before authorising continued detention — Whether failure to consult rendering review defective and subsequent detention unlawful — Whether solicitor involved in police interview “not available at the time of the review” — Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (c 60), s 40

  POLICE — Duties — Persons detained — Review officer authorising person’s continued detention at police station — Whether failure to comply with review requirements rendering subsequent detention unlawful — Whether review officer failing to comply with requirement to give person’s solicitor opportunity to make representations about review decision — Proper approach to damages to be awarded where defective review rendering detention unlawful — Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (c 60), s 40

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered
• R (ALR) v Chancellor of the Exchequer (R (ALX) v Chancellor of the Exchequer, R (Emmanuel School (Derby) Ltd (trading as Emmanuel School) v Chancellor of the Exchequer, R (Emmanuel School (Derby) Ltd (trading as Emmanuel School)) v Chancellor of the Exchequer)

  13 Jun 2025 [2025] EWHC 1467 (Admin); [2026] 1 WLR 10; [2025] WLR(D) 320, DC (Dame Victoria Sharp P, Newey LJ, Chamberlain J)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; most recently considered: 2025. Subsequent citations: 4.
  REVENUE — Value added tax — Education

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Education — Private schools

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Peaceful enjoyment of possessions — Private schools
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  REVENUE — Value added tax — Education — Claimants providing or requiring private school education for special educational needs or need for single-sex education, faith-based curriculum or foreign curriculum — Government removing VAT exemption for private school fees — Claimants unable to afford increased fees whilst state-funded education unable to provide for specific needs — Whether imposition of VAT on private school fees incompatible with right to access education — Whether measure discriminatory — Whether decision not to create exemptions for exceptional circumstances proportionate — Value Added Tax Act 1994 (c 23), Sch 9 — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), Sch 1, Pt I, art 14; Pt II, art 2 — Finance Act 2025 (c 8), ss 47–49

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Education — Private schools — Legislation removing VAT exemption for provision of private school education — Whether incompatible with right of access to education — Whether disproportionate interference with such right — Whether involving unjustified discrimination in enjoyment of such right — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), Sch 1, Pt I, art 14, Pt II, art 2 — Finance Act 2025 (c 8), ss 47, 48, 49

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Peaceful enjoyment of possessions — Private schools — Legislation removing VAT exemption for provision of private school education — Whether incompatible with right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions — Whether depriving private schools or parents of private school children of “possessions” — Whether involving unjustified discrimination in enjoyment of such right — Human Rights Act 1998, Sch 1, Pt I, art 14, Pt II, art 1 — Finance Act 2025, ss 47, 48, 49

  17 Case(s) considered

  3 Statutes considered

• Fertré v Vale of White Horse District Council

  08 Jul 2024 [2024] EWHC 1754 (KB); [2024] 1 WLR 5453; [2024] WLR(D) 344, KBD (Jay J)

  31 Jul 2025 [2025] EWCA Civ 1057; [2026] 2 WLR 1; [2025] WLR(D) 438, CA (Underhill, Newey, Whipple LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 2.
  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of movement — Right to reside
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of movement — Right to reside — French claimant resident in UK granted pre-settled status on UK exit from European Union — Local authority refusing to grant housing assistance on basis claimant ineligible — Whether agreement on withdrawal from EU precluding domestic rules requiring those with pre-settled status to fulfil eligibility requirements for social assistance to which British citizens with habitual residence not subject — European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (c 16), s 7A — Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, arts 13(1)(4), 18(1), 23(1) — FEU Treaty, art 21(1) — Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC, arts 6, 24

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of movement — Right to reside — French applicant residing in UK pursuant to EU right to reside for three months — Applicant granted pre-settled status within transition period of UK’s withdrawal from EU — Applicant applying for housing assistance after expiry of transition period — Local authority refusing application on basis applicant person from abroad — Whether contrary to Withdrawal Agreement — Whether Withdrawal Agreement entitling applicant to equal treatment with UK nationals — Whether applicant “residing on the basis of” Withdrawal Agreement — Nature of rights conferred by grant of pre-settled status — Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, arts 13(1)(4), 18(1), 23(1) — Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC, arts 6, 7

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of movement — Right to reside — French applicant residing in UK pursuant to EU right to reside for three months — Applicant granted pre-settled status within transition period of UK’s withdrawal from EU — Applicant applying for housing assistance after expiry of transition period — Local authority refusing application on basis applicant person from abroad — Whether Withdrawal Agreement entitling applicant to equal treatment with UK nationals — Whether applicant “residing on the basis of” Withdrawal Agreement — Nature of rights conferred by grant of pre-settled status — Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, arts 13(1)(4), 18(1), 23(1) — Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC, arts 6, 7

  EUROPEAN UNION — Freedom of movement — Right to reside — French applicant residing in UK pursuant to EU right to reside for three months — Applicant granted pre-settled status within transition period of UK’s withdrawal from EU — Whether Withdrawal Agreement entitling applicant to equal treatment with UK nationals — Whether applicant “residing on the basis of” Withdrawal Agreement — Nature of rights conferred by grant of pre-settled status — Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, arts 10, 13(1)(4), 18(1), 23(1) — Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC, arts 6, 24

  5 Case(s) considered

  3 EU Enactments considered

  1 Statute considered

• R v BSH

  04 Jun 2025 [2025] EWCA Crim 706; [2026] 1 WLR 1; [2025] WLR(D) 473, CA (William Davis LJ, Wall, Hill JJ)

  MILITARY LAW — Court martial — Jurisdiction

  MILITARY LAW — Court martial — Appeal
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  MILITARY LAW — Court martial — Jurisdiction — Defendant charged with offence of sexual activity with a child while a person in a position of trust — Preliminary hearing — Judge Advocate General dismissing case on basis that, on the evidence presented, no reasonable Court Martial Board could draw inference that such activity having taken place — Whether prosecution having right of appeal against ruling dismissing case at preliminary stage — Armed Forces Act 2006 (c 52), s 163(3) — Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules 2009 (SI 2009/2041), rr 26, 50

  MILITARY LAW — Court martial — Appeal — Charge against defendant dismissed prior to arraignment — Whether prosecution having right of appeal — Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules 2009 (SI 2009/2041), rr 26, 50

  1 Case considered

  1 Statute considered

  2 Statutory Instruments considered