A vessel charter was delayed indefinitely when the ship was requisitioned by the Government before delivery. The House of Lords held that the prolonged requisition frustrated the contract, despite a standard “restraint of princes” clause, because it fundamentally destroyed the commercial venture contemplated by the parties.
Bank Mellat, an Iranian commercial bank, challenged a Treasury order restricting its access to UK financial markets due to alleged connections with Iran's nuclear weapons programme. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, finding the order was both procedurally unfair for lack of prior consultation and substantively disproportionate as it arbitrarily singled out Bank Mellat from comparable Iranian banks.
Melissa's parents used proceeds from selling their mortgaged home to buy a property in her name, with the Bank releasing its security on the understanding it would receive a charge over the new property. The charge proved void. The Supreme Court held the Bank could be subrogated to the unpaid vendor's lien to reverse Melissa's unjust enrichment.
Banks v Goodfellow is the seminal English authority on testamentary capacity, establishing the common law test that, over 150 years later, still governs whether a testator has sufficient mental capacity to make a valid will. The Court of Queen's Bench, in a judgment delivered by Cockburn C.J., held that a person suffering from a mental illness or delusions is not automatically disqualified from making a valid will, provided that the delusions do not influence the particular testamentary disposition being made. The decision rejected the earlier, more restrictive approach in Waring v Waring (1848) 6 Moo. P.C. 341, which was premised on the…
Mr Barber, a schoolteacher, suffered a mental breakdown due to work-related stress after his employer failed to respond adequately to his complaints about workload. The House of Lords restored the trial judge's finding that the employer breached its duty of care by failing to investigate and provide assistance following clear warning signs of psychiatric harm.
Barclays incurred nearly £4 million after Fairclough’s defective asbestos work. The Court of Appeal held that contributory negligence could not reduce damages for breach of a strict contractual obligation, so Barclays was entitled to recover the full agreed loss.
Mrs O’Brien mortgaged the matrimonial home to secure her husband’s company debts after he misrepresented the transaction. The Court of Appeal set the charge aside, holding that Barclays was put on inquiry and had failed to take reasonable steps to ensure her consent was properly obtained.
Claimants alleged sexual assault by Dr Bates during medical examinations arranged by Barclays Bank. The Supreme Court held the Bank was not vicariously liable because Dr Bates was an independent contractor running his own medical practice, not an employee or person in a relationship akin to employment with the Bank.
Workers contracted mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos by multiple employers. The House of Lords held that defendants liable under the Fairchild exception should bear only several liability proportionate to their contribution to the risk, not joint and several liability for the whole damage.
Barnardo's sought to switch its pension scheme indexation from RPI to CPI to reduce the scheme's deficit. The Supreme Court held that the trust deed only permitted trustees to adopt a replacement index if the RPI itself had been officially discontinued.
A court-appointed receiver managed companies under a POCA order later quashed on appeal. The Supreme Court held taking the companies' assets to pay his £772,547 costs would breach A1P1, but the CPS was liable in unjust enrichment for failure of consideration.
Three night-watchmen attended hospital after vomiting from drinking tea. The casualty officer refused to see them, advising they go home. Mr Barnett died hours later from arsenic poisoning. His widow's negligence claim failed as proper treatment would not have saved him, establishing the 'but for' test of causation.
Residents of the Vicarage Estate near Ware sued Biffa for nuisance caused by offensive smells from a waste tip receiving pre-treated waste. The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge erred in law by requiring compliance with regulatory permits to equate to reasonable use, and by setting an arbitrary threshold of complaint days. The appeal was allowed, reaffirming traditional nuisance principles.
Martin Lavin died in hospital hours after a disputed will was produced leaving everything to his sister Anne, who allegedly signed it. The Court of Appeal held the will invalid, requiring positive communication by a testator to direct another to sign.
A child taken into care at 10 months alleged the local authority negligently failed in its duty of care during his upbringing, causing psychiatric illness. The House of Lords allowed the appeal against strike out, holding that claims against local authorities for negligent exercise of child care duties are not automatically non-justiciable and should proceed to trial.
Mr Barton introduced a buyer for Nash House which sold for £6 million rather than the £6.5 million that would have triggered payment of £1.2 million under an oral agreement. The Supreme Court held that the contractual silence about sales below £6.5 million meant no payment was due, and unjust enrichment could not override the parties' contractual allocation of risk.
Armstrong, chairman of Landmark Corporation, threatened to have Barton, the managing director, killed unless he executed a deed purchasing Armstrong's shares. The Privy Council held that a contract may be avoided for physical duress even if the threats were not the main reason for entering the agreement.
Mr Barton, a litigant in person, attempted to serve a professional negligence claim form on the defendant's solicitors by email on the last day of its validity, without checking they would accept email service. The Supreme Court refused to validate service under CPR 6.15(2).
Dr Verma, a part-time hospital practitioner, took a lower-grade NHS training post. The Supreme Court held that paragraph 132 of the NHS terms protects the incremental pay rate, not the amount previously earned, so her protected sessional rate converted to hourly rates applied to all hours worked. Appeal allowed.
Ms Wong, a Filipino domestic worker, claimed she was trafficked and exploited by diplomat Mr Basfar, working excessive hours without proper pay. The Supreme Court held that exploiting a domestic worker in circumstances of modern slavery constitutes 'commercial activity' under the Vienna Convention, thereby falling within an exception to diplomatic immunity.
Mr Baxter sought to commit Mrs Doble and her company for contempt, alleging they unlawfully conducted litigation for his landlord in possession proceedings without being authorised under the Legal Services Act 2007. The court found conduct of litigation occurred but the statutory defence applied.
Mrs Beesley claimed damages as widow and executrix following her husband's death from mesothelioma caused by asbestos exposure during his employment with the defendant. The court assessed damages under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 and Fatal Accidents Act 1976, awarding £242,853 for pain and suffering, care, loss of earnings, and dependency.
Mrs Beghal was stopped at East Midlands Airport under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and convicted for refusing to answer questions. The Supreme Court held by majority that Schedule 7 was compatible with Articles 5, 6 and 8 ECHR.
Mr Beldjoudi, born in France to Algerian parents, faced deportation despite living his entire life in France and being married to a French woman for over 20 years. The Court held that implementing the deportation order would violate Article 8, as it would disproportionately interfere with the couple's family life.
French-speaking Belgian parents challenged language education laws requiring Dutch-language instruction in Flemish regions. Belgium raised a preliminary objection to the Court's jurisdiction. The Court unanimously rejected this objection, establishing that disputes concerning interpretation and application of the Convention fall within its jurisdiction.
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive