The National Case Law Archive provides structured case summaries with case details, a clear one-paragraph holding, and breakdowns of the facts, issues, judgment, and implications – so you can get to the point quickly. Use the index and key terms to explore landmark decisions across UK jurisdictions, with plain-English context for study and research. You can also see our helpful list of Supreme Court cases and House of Lords cases.
Twin brothers, Lithuanian nationals and victims of human trafficking, were denied compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme due to unspent criminal convictions from Lithuania predating their trafficking. The Supreme Court held that excluding them did not constitute unjustified discrimination under Article 14 read with Article 4 ECHR.
JB, a 38-year-old man with autism and brain damage, sought to engage in sexual relations but lacked understanding that sexual partners must consent throughout. The Supreme Court held that capacity to decide to engage in sexual relations under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 requires understanding that the other person must be able to consent and maintains consent throughout.
A lesbian couple conceived a child using a gay male friend as sperm donor, with B marrying A for family acceptance. Disputes arose over A's contact role. The Court of Appeal allowed A's appeal, holding the trial judge erred in fixing A's future role as definitively limited.
The BBC challenged a Court of Session order anonymising a foreign sex offender (A) in judicial review proceedings concerning his deportation. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding the anonymity order was justified at common law and compatible with article 10 ECHR.
A child with a shunt suffered brain damage when a blocked shunt was not diagnosed by telephone. The GP failed to ask specific questions that would have revealed symptoms indicating shunt blockage. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered a retrial, finding the trial judge had improperly applied the Bolitho exception without giving parties opportunity to respond.
In 1988 the defendant attempted to rape the claimant and received a life sentence. After his 2004 release he won £7 million on the National Lottery, prompting the claimant to sue for psychiatric injury. Despite a 16‑year delay, the court exercised its section 33 discretion to disapply limitation and allow her personal injury claim to proceed.
Claimants infected with Hepatitis C from blood transfusions between 1988 and 1991 sued the National Blood Authority under the Consumer Protection Act 1987. The court held that infected blood was a defective product under the EU Product Liability Directive, establishing that consumers were entitled to expect blood free from infection regardless of whether the defect was avoidable.
A Jamaican woman who had informed police about her daughter's killer faced threats from a gang. She claimed asylum and human rights protection. The Court of Appeal admitted fresh expert evidence showing she would face a real risk of harm throughout Jamaica and allowed her appeal under Articles 2 and 3 ECHR.
Foreign nationals suspected of terrorism were detained under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 following the 9/11 attacks. The Court of Appeal allowed the Secretary of State's appeal, holding that detention of non-nationals alone was not discriminatory as they were in a different legal position from British nationals regarding immigration status.
An RTM company failed to serve a claim notice on an intermediate landlord as required under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. The Supreme Court held that such failure does not automatically invalidate the right to manage acquisition, but renders the transfer voidable rather than void, depending on whether the affected party lost any substantive right to object.
A child brought privacy proceedings against the Daily Mail for publishing articles revealing her paternity, alleging her father was a prominent politician. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's dismissal of the claim for damages regarding the private information, finding the public interest in the father's recklessness and fitness for public office outweighed the child's reduced expectation of privacy.
Glencore and the Claimants disputed the scope of legal advice privilege over intra-client documents. Picken J held that privilege extends to communications between members of the client group created for the dominant purpose of seeking legal advice, even where no lawyer is party to them.
Claimants sought a declaration that their professional negligence claim against an architect was settled by agreement reached through mediation. The court held that a binding settlement was concluded when the claimants accepted the defendant's offer via the mediator, despite the defendant's argument that negotiations were 'subject to contract' and required formal written agreement.
The Supreme Court held that section 39(2)(a)(i) of the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009, which removed the reasonable belief as to age defence from anyone previously charged by police with a relevant sexual offence, was incompatible with article 8 ECHR where the prior charge gave no warning about consensual sexual activity with older children.
Parents claimed damages for psychiatric injury after discovering organs had been removed and retained from their deceased children during post-mortems without their knowledge or consent. The court held that while doctors owed a duty of care to explain organ retention possibilities, there is no tort of wrongful interference with a body and only one claimant succeeded in negligence.
Parents of gravely ill children who died sought discharge of injunctions protecting clinicians' identities after end-of-life treatment disputes. The Supreme Court held that while courts can grant such injunctions under parens patriae powers during proceedings, continuation after death requires clinicians to assert their own rights rather than NHS trusts doing so on their behalf.
A contractor provided a collateral warranty to a lessee regarding construction of a care home. When fire safety defects arose, the lessee sought statutory adjudication. The Supreme Court held that collateral warranties which merely replicate obligations from the underlying building contract are not 'construction contracts' under the Housing Grants (Construction & Regeneration) Act 1996.
Test cases from thousands of military noise-induced hearing loss claims against the MoD. The High Court determined generic issues including diagnostic methods, quantification, and tinnitus, preferring Prof Moore's rM-NIHL method over CLB for diagnosis. Mr Lambie succeeded; Mr Craggs largely failed on causation.
Two siblings challenged Scotland's children's hearings system, arguing article 8 ECHR required them to be granted 'relevant person' status in proceedings concerning their brothers/sisters subject to compulsory supervision orders. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals but recognised a procedural gap requiring sensible operation to respect siblings' family life.
The claimant's father was diagnosed with Huntington's Disease while she was pregnant. Despite knowing the diagnosis carried a 50% hereditary risk to her, clinicians respected the father's confidentiality wishes and did not inform her. She later discovered she had the disease and sued, arguing the defendants owed her a duty of care to disclose. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding the claim arguable and remitting it for trial.
Somali refugee Mrs Abdi sought entry clearance for her orphaned nieces and nephews under the Somali family reunion policy. The Home Secretary refused, not being satisfied they were her dependants. The Court of Appeal held the decision was not in accordance with law as it was based on a factual misapprehension regarding dependency, and remitted the case for reconsideration.
Three women lawfully settled in the United Kingdom challenged immigration rules preventing their non-national husbands from joining them. The Court found the rules discriminated on grounds of sex, violating Article 14 with Article 8, as women faced stricter requirements than men for spousal settlement.
Elsick challenged a planning authority's supplementary guidance requiring developers to contribute to a pooled Strategic Transport Fund for infrastructure across Aberdeen. The Supreme Court held the scheme unlawful, as contributions bore only trivial connection to individual developments, exceeding statutory powers under section 75 of the 1997 Act.
A railway company's director, Thomas Blaikie, contracted on behalf of the company with his own firm for iron chairs. The House of Lords held that directors cannot enter contracts with companies they serve, as fiduciary duties prohibit conflicts between personal interest and duty to the company.
The Attorney General for Northern Ireland referred a question to the Supreme Court regarding whether clause 5(2)(a) of the Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) Bill, which criminalises acts intended to influence persons accessing abortion services within designated zones, was outside the Assembly's legislative competence as disproportionately interfering with protesters' Convention rights. The Court held the provision was proportionate and within competence.
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive