Police arrested Leachinsky for 'unlawful possession' under the Liverpool Corporation Act, knowing they lacked authority to arrest without warrant on that charge. They actually suspected felony but never informed him. The House of Lords held that a person arrested must be informed of the true reason for arrest, establishing fundamental principles protecting individual liberty.
Mr Lau and Mr Chu were equal shareholders in OSL, a BVI quasi-partnership company. Following complete breakdown of trust and deadlock, Mr Lau sought winding up on just and equitable grounds. The Privy Council restored the winding-up order, holding the Court of Appeal wrongly interfered with the trial judge's findings.
Teenage vandals discharged a dry powder fire extinguisher throughout a medieval church, causing £240,000 in cleaning costs. The church sued the extinguisher supplier for failing to warn about the mess such discharge could cause. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding the supplier not liable.
Mrs Pitt was induced by her husband's actual undue influence to charge their jointly-owned home to secure a loan ostensibly for a holiday home, but actually used by Mr Pitt for share speculation. The House of Lords held that manifest disadvantage need not be proved in cases of actual undue influence, but dismissed the appeal as the lender had no notice of the husband's wrongdoing.
Citco challenged special resolutions amending a BVI company's articles to create class B shares with 50 votes each, converted from shares held by the chairman Mr Tobias, giving him control. The Privy Council upheld the amendments, finding shareholders could reasonably believe they benefited the company seeking new finance.
Two claimants were injured in separate incidents in car parks - one struck by a car in an open car park, another injured by fire in a multi-storey car park. The House of Lords held that car parks do not constitute 'roads' under the Road Traffic Act 1988, meaning compulsory motor insurance requirements did not apply to these locations.
A probate dispute between siblings over their mother's wills. The High Court upheld the Deputy Master's finding that the testatrix lacked capacity due to an affective disorder and insane delusions about her daughter, confirming that the Banks v Goodfellow test, not the Mental Capacity Act 2005, governs testamentary capacity.
A mentally disordered patient sued the health authority for negligence in failing to provide adequate aftercare following his discharge from hospital, claiming this led to him committing manslaughter. The Court of Appeal held his claim was barred by public policy (ex turpi causa) as it was based on his own criminal act, and that the statutory duty under section 117 of the Mental Health Act 1983 did not give rise to a private law duty of care.
A solicitor and equity member of Clyde & Co LLP made disclosures about bribery by a Tanzanian joint venture partner and was expelled. The Supreme Court held that a member of an LLP can be a 'worker' under section 230(3)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, entitling her to whistle-blower protection.
Mr Simonet, managing director of CMS Dolphin Ltd, resigned and diverted clients Argos, Reebok and DFB to his new venture with Mr Patterson. The court held he breached fiduciary duties by appropriating maturing business opportunities and was accountable for profits, even though profits were made through a corporate vehicle.
Argyll closed their Safeway supermarket in breach of a lease covenant requiring them to keep premises open for retail trade. CIS sought specific performance to compel continued trading. The House of Lords refused, holding that courts will not normally order specific performance requiring a defendant to carry on a business, as damages were the appropriate remedy.
A property developer obtained planning permission for a site under an oral 'agreement in principle' with the owner, who then reneged and demanded better terms. The House of Lords held proprietary estoppel and constructive trust were unavailable, awarding only a quantum meruit for services rendered.
Mr Collier, jointly liable with two partners on a judgment debt, claimed a creditor had agreed to accept only his one-third share. The Court of Appeal held no binding contract existed but set aside the statutory demand, finding a triable promissory estoppel issue.
An attorney attended court for six days as a subpoenaed witness but was not called to give evidence. He sued for compensation for his loss of time. The court held that attendance as a witness under subpoena is a legal duty, so no action lies for compensation as there is no consideration for any promise to pay.
A husband promised his wife annual maintenance but never paid. After divorce, she sued to enforce the promise, relying on promissory estoppel. The Court of Appeal held estoppel is a shield, not a sword, and cannot create a cause of action.
Wife left matrimonial home with husband's consent for a holiday but did not return. Husband petitioned for divorce claiming wife's desertion revived her previously condoned adultery. Court found husband failed to prove wife intended to desert, as he kept her short of money and showed no genuine desire for her return. Appeal dismissed.
Two victims of serial rapist black cab driver John Worboys sued the Metropolitan Police for failures in investigating his crimes. The Supreme Court held that article 3 ECHR imposes an investigative duty on police, and serious operational failures can breach it, entitling victims to compensation.
A tax-exempt pension fund trustee claimed repayment of manufactured overseas dividend withholding tax (MOD WHT), arguing the UK tax regime for stock lending of overseas shares restricted free movement of capital contrary to EU law. The Supreme Court held there was no breach of Article 63 TFEU and the remedy claimed was disproportionate.
Two subsidiary companies claimed corporation tax deductions for accounting debits arising from share options granted to their employees by the parent company's employee benefit trust. HMRC contested the deductions. The Supreme Court held the debits were deductible trading expenses calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting practice.
The Supreme Court considered whether members of BlueCrest, a hedge fund LLP, should be treated as employees under the salaried members legislation. The Court dismissed BlueCrest's appeal on both Conditions A and B, upholding remittal to the First-tier Tribunal.
The Fisher family transferred their telebetting business from a UK company to a Gibraltar company. HMRC sought to tax the Fishers under the transfer of assets abroad code. The Supreme Court held that section 739 ICTA 1988 only applies to individuals who actually transfer assets, not to shareholders of a transferring company.
Hotel La Tour Ltd sought to recover VAT on professional fees incurred for selling shares in its subsidiary to fund a new hotel development. The key issue was whether input VAT on costs related to an exempt share sale could be deducted when the proceeds funded taxable economic activities.
HMRC argued that part-time football referees in the National Group were employees of PGMOL for tax and National Insurance purposes. The Supreme Court held that individual match contracts satisfied the requirements of mutuality of obligation and control necessary for employment, remitting the case to determine overall employment status.
Individual members of forex trading LLP HFFX used a Capital Allocation Plan to defer remuneration via a corporate partner, GSAM, taxed at lower corporation tax rates. The Supreme Court held the deferred sums were taxable as income under section 687 ITTOIA, but section 850 did not apply.
Flynn Pharma and Pfizer successfully appealed to the CAT against a CMA decision finding they had abused dominant positions by charging excessive prices for epilepsy drug phenytoin sodium. The CAT ordered the CMA to pay a proportion of the appellants' costs. The Court of Appeal reversed this, applying a 'no order as to costs' starting point for public bodies. The Supreme Court allowed the appellants' appeal, restoring the CAT's costs order and holding there is no general principle protecting public bodies from adverse costs orders.
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive