Servier obtained an interim injunction preventing Apotex selling generic perindopril in the UK, giving the usual cross-undertaking in damages. After the UK patent was held invalid, Apotex claimed on the undertaking. Servier argued illegality, since manufacture would have infringed its Canadian patent. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.
Mrs Letang was sunbathing in a car park when Mr Cooper accidentally drove his car over her legs, causing injury. She sued more than three years later, claiming trespass to the person to avoid the three-year limitation period for negligence. The Court of Appeal held that unintentional injury claims are properly classified as negligence, not trespass, and the three-year limitation applied.
Bell and Snelling, appointed to manage the Niger Company by Lever Brothers, secretly engaged in cocoa speculation breaching their duties. When their service agreements were terminated with substantial compensation, Levers later discovered the misconduct and sought to rescind the settlement agreements. The House of Lords held the agreements were not void for mutual mistake and there was no duty to disclose past misconduct.
Mrs Levi suffered alarm and distress from harassment targeted at her husband by Mr Bates, who published their home address and telephone number encouraging football supporters to confront them. The Court of Appeal held that victims of foreseeable collateral damage from harassment targeted at another can claim under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.
Mr Lewis sold his car to a rogue who fraudulently impersonated the film actor Richard Greene. The rogue then sold the car to Mr Averay, an innocent purchaser. The Court of Appeal held that the contract between Lewis and the rogue was voidable for fraud, not void for mistake, so title passed to Averay.
A man who killed three people during a psychotic episode was found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity. He sued healthcare providers for negligence, claiming damages for his detention and other losses. The Supreme Court held that the illegality defence barred his civil claim despite his lack of criminal responsibility, as allowing recovery would damage the integrity of the legal system.
Lexi Holdings, a bridging finance company, had £59.6 million misappropriated by its managing director Shaid Luqman. The Court of Appeal held that his sisters Monuza and Zaurian, as directors, were liable for losses caused by their total inactivity, as they failed to inform fellow directors of Shaid's criminal convictions and a fictitious directors' loan account.
Lidl sued Tesco over its blue-square/yellow-circle Clubcard Prices signs. The Court of Appeal upheld findings of trade mark infringement (s.10(3)) and passing off based on a price-matching misrepresentation, allowed Tesco's appeal on copyright, and upheld the bad-faith invalidation of Lidl's 'Wordless Mark' registrations.
Trade mark owners sued company directors for infringements committed by their company. The Supreme Court held that accessory liability for torts of strict liability requires knowledge of the essential facts making the act wrongful. Directors cannot be ordered to account for profits made by the company, only their own profits.
Lifestyle Equities, owner of UK and EU trade marks for BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB, sued Amazon for trade mark infringement through marketing and selling goods bearing identical marks on Amazon's USA website to UK consumers. The Supreme Court held Amazon had targeted UK consumers, constituting infringement.
Two appeals concerning building contracts with clauses prohibiting assignment without consent. The House of Lords held that such prohibition clauses are valid and effective to prevent assignment of contractual rights. However, an original contracting party can recover substantial damages for breach even after parting with property, applying the Dunlop v Lambert principle.
Mr and Mrs Lipton's flight from Milan to London was cancelled due to pilot illness. They claimed compensation under EU Regulation 261/2004. The Supreme Court held that pilot illness is not an 'extraordinary circumstance' excusing compensation, as managing staff absence is inherent to airline operations.
Boys at a residential school were sexually abused by the warden employed to care for them. The House of Lords held that the school owners were vicariously liable for the warden's torts, as his wrongdoing was closely connected with his employment duties of caring for the children, overruling the restrictive approach in Trotman.
A lorry driver negligently injured his father while reversing in a yard during employment. The employer, held vicariously liable, sought indemnity from the driver. The House of Lords held that employees owe an implied contractual duty of care to employers and rejected implied terms protecting drivers from personal liability through employer insurance.
Littlewoods overpaid VAT to HMRC over decades due to a mistake of law. HMRC repaid the principal and simple interest totalling £268m, but Littlewoods sought £1.25bn in compound interest at common law. The Supreme Court rejected the claim, holding it was statutorily excluded and not required by EU law.
An elderly farmer charged his only asset, Yew Tree Farm, to secure his son's company debts after the bank manager visited without suggesting independent advice. The Court of Appeal set aside the guarantee and charge on grounds of undue influence, establishing that banks owe fiduciary duties when crossing from routine transactions into advisory relationships with vulnerable customers.
The Supreme Court held that an unrealised £11bn "gain on acquisition" arising from Lloyds' rescue of HBOS, newly required by IFRS 3, fell outside the "group profit before taxation" in a 1997 charitable covenant. Appeal allowed; the Foundation received only the £38,920 minimum.
A fire at the defendants' polystyrene manufacturing premises spread to adjoining units owned and occupied by the claimants, causing extensive damage. The court found the defendants strictly liable under Rylands v Fletcher for non-natural use of land involving dangerous materials, and alternatively liable in negligence for inadequate fire safety measures and employee training.
A finance company leased a computer to an accountant who repeatedly made late payments. The lease stipulated that punctual payment was 'of the essence'. When the hirer defaulted, the company terminated the agreement and claimed damages for loss of the entire transaction. The Court of Appeal held that the 'time is of the essence' clause made timely payment a condition, entitling the owner to damages for loss of the whole bargain despite the penalty clause being struck down.
Lambeth Council granted permission under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to vary a condition restricting retail sales at a Streatham store. The decision notice stated 'proposed wording' but did not expressly reimpose it as a condition. The Supreme Court held the permission should be read as imposing the varied condition, allowing the Council's appeal.
Nuffield Health, a registered charity operating gyms, claimed mandatory 80% business rates relief for its Merton Abbey gym. Merton Council argued the gym's fees excluded those of modest means, failing the public benefit test. The Supreme Court held that charitable purpose is assessed by the charity's activities overall, not site-by-site.
Transport for London disputed with London borough councils over what property transferred when highways were redesignated as GLA roads. The Supreme Court held that 'highway' in the Transfer Order included all property vested in the former authority in its capacity as highway authority, not merely the surface zone.
The House of Lords established that its own previous decisions on points of law are binding and conclusive, preventing the same legal question from being re-argued. This case established the doctrine of stare decisis at the highest appellate level, ensuring finality in litigation.
Mr Long purchased a lorry from Mr Lloyd after misrepresentations about its condition, including that it was in first-class condition and could achieve 40mph and 11 miles per gallon. After discovering defects, Long sought rescission. The Court held that even if rescission for innocent misrepresentation survived completion, Long had lost this right through acceptance by using the lorry and accepting partial payment for repairs.
Mrs López Ostra lived 12 metres from a waste treatment plant that emitted fumes, smells and noise causing health problems and nuisance. Despite complaints, Spanish authorities failed to adequately address the pollution. The ECtHR held Spain violated Article 8, establishing that severe environmental pollution can breach the right to private and family life.
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive