Mr Tooth used a tax avoidance scheme and completed his self-assessment return by entering an employment-related loss in a partnership box due to software limitations, with full explanations provided. HMRC sought to issue a discovery assessment claiming deliberate inaccuracy. The Supreme Court held there was no deliberate inaccuracy as the return, read as a whole, was accurate and not intended to mislead.
HMRC appealed against Vermilion Holdings Ltd regarding whether a securities option granted to an employee's nominee constituted an employment-related securities option under section 471 of ITEPA 2003. The Supreme Court allowed HMRC's appeal, holding that the deeming provision in section 471(3) applied, making the option taxable as employment income.
Ms Reyes, a Filipina domestic worker, sued her Saudi diplomat employer for trafficking and exploitation. The Supreme Court allowed her appeal, holding that since the diplomat's posting had ended, residual immunity under article 39(2) did not cover non-official acts like employing domestic staff.
Mrs Reynolds was arrested by police during a raid on her home, despite having no reasonable grounds for suspicion of involvement in an arrestable offence. She was detained for a day at Limehouse Police Station. The Court of Appeal upheld the jury's award of £12,000 damages for false imprisonment.
Former Irish Taoiseach Albert Reynolds sued The Sunday Times for libel over an article alleging he lied to the Dáil and his cabinet. The House of Lords rejected a blanket privilege for political speech, instead setting flexible factors for when media publications on matters of public interest gain qualified privilege.
Rangers Football Club paid employees' remuneration through an Employee Benefit Trust and sub-trusts, with funds extended to players as loans, to avoid income tax and NICs. The Supreme Court held that earnings redirected to a third party trust remain taxable employment income.
A 20‑year‑old dived into Astbury Mere, striking his head on a submerged fibreglass container and suffering catastrophic injury. As a trespasser, he claimed under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984. The Court of Appeal held the occupiers had no duty, as they neither knew nor ought reasonably to have known of the hidden obstruction.
Concert pianist James Rhodes sought to publish an autobiography detailing childhood sexual abuse. His ex-wife brought proceedings on behalf of their son, claiming publication would cause the child psychological harm under the Wilkinson v Downton tort. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding the tort did not extend to truthful autobiographical accounts.
Ms Rhuppiah, a Tanzanian national, challenged her removal from the UK under article 8 ECHR. The Supreme Court interpreted 'precarious' immigration status in section 117B(5) of the 2002 Act as covering anyone with leave short of indefinite leave to remain.
Protesters trespassed in a London shop selling Israeli Dead Sea products, chaining themselves together to disrupt trading. They were convicted of aggravated trespass under section 68 of the 1994 Act. The Supreme Court held alleged offences must be integral to the occupier's core activity.
Following divorce proceedings, the husband sought to appeal a financial order out of time. The county court refused an extension of time. The Court of Appeal considered whether it had jurisdiction to hear an appeal against that refusal, declining to follow Podberry v Peak and holding that Lane v Esdaile applied only to refusals of leave to appeal, not extensions of time.
The Court of Appeal consolidated six appeals concerning wasted costs orders against legal representatives. The court provided comprehensive guidance on when solicitors and barristers may be ordered to pay costs personally due to improper, unreasonable or negligent conduct under section 51 of the Supreme Court Act 1981.
Oxfordshire County Council relocated Nettlebed School to adjacent premises, then sold the original site donated under the School Sites Act 1841. The Supreme Court held that section 14 permitted sale with vacant possession after relocation, provided the proceeds were intended for the new school. No statutory reverter arose.
Dr Robertson cancelled a home-removal contract after paying a deposit. The Supreme Court held that a trader's failure to give written notice of the right to cancel under the 2008 Regulations did not deprive the consumer of that right, allowing recovery of the deposit.
A Jamaican national facing deportation made further human rights submissions after his appeal rights were exhausted. The Supreme Court held that such submissions must first be accepted as a fresh claim under rule 353 of the Immigration Rules before any right of appeal arises under section 82.
A Jamaican mother of a British child challenged her deportation, arguing her derivative Zambrano right of residence meant she could only be deported in 'exceptional circumstances'. The Supreme Court dismissed her appeal, holding no additional exceptionality hurdle applies beyond the established proportionality test.
Mrs Robinson, a frail 76‑year‑old pedestrian, was injured when plain‑clothes officers attempted to arrest a drug suspect in a busy street and all fell on her. The Supreme Court held the police owed her a duty of care, rejecting any general immunity and clarifying that Caparo is not a universal test and that positive acts causing foreseeable injury attract ordinary negligence liability.
Police forced entry into Mr Robinson-Pierre’s home, releasing his pit bull which attacked officers in the street. Convicted under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, he appealed. The Court of Appeal held section 3(1) creates strict but not absolute liability, requiring some causal act or omission by the owner, and quashed the convictions.
Rock, a minority shareholder, petitioned under s.459 Companies Act 1985 alleging unfair prejudice when the majority shareholder ISS caused the company to sell its subsidiary at an alleged undervalue. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no undervalue as the sale price represented the best reasonably obtainable price.
Rock Advertising orally agreed a revised payment schedule with MWB's credit controller, despite the licence containing a No Oral Modification clause. The Supreme Court held such clauses are legally effective, so the oral variation was invalid, restoring MWB's judgment.
Two patients became paralysed after spinal anaesthetics administered at a hospital. Phenol had seeped through invisible cracks in glass ampoules into the anaesthetic. The Court of Appeal held neither the hospital nor the anaesthetist was negligent, as the risk of invisible cracks was not foreseeable in 1947.
The buyers rejected timber staves that were commercially usable but did not strictly match the contractual thickness. The House of Lords held that goods sold by description must comply precisely with that description, so the buyers were entitled to reject the shipment.
A convicted criminal sued his barrister for negligence in conducting his defence at trial. The House of Lords unanimously held that barristers enjoy immunity from negligence claims arising from their conduct of litigation, based on public policy considerations including the barrister's duty to the court and the administration of justice.
Trade union officials threatened B.O.A.C. with strike action in breach of contract unless the employer dismissed a non-union employee. The House of Lords held this constituted the tort of intimidation, recognising that threats to breach contracts could form the basis of this tort, and that the Trade Disputes Act 1906 provided no immunity.
Rose and Frank Company, American paper dealers, had arrangements with English paper manufacturers Crompton and Brittains. A 1913 memorandum contained an 'honourable pledge' clause stating it was not a legal agreement. The House of Lords held this clause effectively negated contractual intention, but individual orders placed and accepted remained enforceable contracts.
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive