Mr Wheat, a paying guest in a public house, fell down an internal back staircase and died. His widow sued the brewery owners under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. The House of Lords held the brewery were occupiers but had not breached the common duty of care.
An advertising company continued to display unwanted advertisements after the customer repudiated the contract on the same day it was signed. The House of Lords held (3-2) that the innocent party could elect to perform the contract and claim the contract price rather than accept repudiation and sue for damages.
Police officers who suffered post-traumatic stress disorder after assisting victims at the Hillsborough disaster claimed damages from their employer. The House of Lords allowed the appeals, holding that the officers were secondary victims who could not recover for psychiatric injury as neither the employment relationship nor their role as helpers gave them primary victim status.
A newsagent was injured when the saddle of a hired bicycle, supplied as a replacement under a hire agreement, tilted forward causing him to fall. The Court of Appeal held that an exemption clause protecting against contractual liability did not extend to liability for negligence, establishing important principles on construing exemption clauses.
Mr Barratt instructed his solicitors to revise his will to benefit his reconciled daughters, but they negligently delayed and he died before execution. The daughters received nothing under the old will. The House of Lords held, by majority, that the solicitors owed them a tortious duty of care.
Celebrity chef Marco Pierre White sued his wife’s solicitors over “Hildebrand” documents she had taken and given to them for ancillary relief proceedings. The Court of Appeal held his trespass to goods and conversion claims should not be struck out, clarifying limits of Hildebrand self‑help.
A mother issued a wrongful birth claim after her son was born with spina bifida. Following her suicide and subsequent negligent delay by her solicitors, her estate and the child’s father sued the solicitors and barrister. The Court of Appeal granted limited permission to appeal only on the father’s personal duty of care claim, refusing permission on quantum.
A woman rendered infertile due to negligent cervical cancer screening sought damages for surrogacy costs. The Supreme Court held damages could include costs of commercial surrogacy abroad using donor eggs, departing from earlier restrictive precedent, reflecting changed social attitudes to family formation.
David Whittle successfully challenged his father Gerald's will, which favoured his sister and her partner. The High Court found the sister had poisoned their father's mind with false allegations, establishing fraudulent calumny and undue influence, and pronounced against the will.
Owners of the Harrow Hotel claimed compensation under section 10 of the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 for loss caused by bridge improvement works. The House of Lords limited compensation to loss that would be actionable at common law, but confirmed that temporary injurious affection to land can be compensable.
Mr Downton falsely told Mrs Wilkinson, as a practical joke, that her husband had been badly injured, causing her severe nervous shock and physical illness. The court held that a wilful act calculated to cause physical harm, and actually causing it, is actionable.
The Supreme Court clarified the status of Privy Council decisions in English courts. It held that domestic courts must follow binding House of Lords or Supreme Court precedent over conflicting JCPC decisions, but introduced a mechanism allowing the JCPC to expressly direct that its decision represents English law.
Mr Willers alleged that Mr Gubay maliciously caused a company to sue him in civil proceedings without reasonable cause, as part of a vendetta, causing reputational, financial and personal harm. The Supreme Court held that the tort of malicious prosecution applies to civil proceedings, allowing his claim to proceed.
A property developer purchased land from a council for over £5 million. After completion, a private sewer easement was discovered crossing the site. The developer sought to rescind the contract on grounds of misrepresentation and mistake. The Court of Appeal held that contractual conditions allocated the risk of unknown easements to the purchaser, precluding rescission.
Eight children were placed in foster care after police protection following concerns about their home. Their parents claimed damages under the Human Rights Act for unlawful section 20 accommodation. The Supreme Court held the accommodation was lawful as parents had not unequivocally objected or requested the children's return.
The plaintiff gave information leading to the conviction of murderers after being severely beaten and fearing death. Despite her motive being conscience rather than the advertised £20 reward, the court held she was entitled to recover as she had fulfilled the conditions of the offer.
Dr Williams alleged the Central Bank of Nigeria dishonestly assisted, and knowingly received funds from, a fraudulent breach of trust by an English solicitor in 1986. The Supreme Court held, by majority, that section 21(1)(a) of the Limitation Act 1980 did not disapply the limitation period against strangers to a trust such as the Bank, so the claims were time-barred.
A carpenter agreed to carry out carpentry work for building contractors at a price that proved too low. When the carpenter encountered financial difficulties, the contractors promised to pay an additional sum to ensure completion and avoid penalties under their main contract. The court held this promise was enforceable as the contractors obtained practical benefits constituting valid consideration.
A teacher resigned after prolonged mistreatment during disciplinary and grievance processes. The EAT held the Tribunal erred in dismissing his constructive dismissal claim by focusing only on the final 'innocuous' act, and substituted findings of constructive and unfair dismissal.
Mr Williams, who suffered from Tourette's syndrome, retired on ill-health grounds and received an enhanced pension calculated on his part-time salary. He claimed this was unfavourable treatment under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010. The Supreme Court dismissed his appeal.
A very premature baby suffered severe visual impairment from retrolental fibroplasia and sued the health authority, alleging negligent oxygen management. The House of Lords held that McGhee did not alter the ordinary burden of proving causation, set aside earlier judgments, and ordered a retrial on causation.
Mr English, a mine worker, was injured on a haulage road when no reasonably safe system existed for men returning at shift end. The House of Lords held that an employer’s duty to provide a safe system of work is personal and non‑delegable, unaffected by common employment or statutory technical management arrangements.
Kenyan coffee sellers contracted with Tanzanian buyers for payment in Kenyan shillings. A letter of credit was issued in sterling, which the sellers accepted and used for payment. After sterling devaluation, sellers claimed the difference. The Court held that by accepting the sterling credit, sellers had waived their right to payment in Kenyan currency.
Morrisons’ employee Andrew Skelton, harbouring a grudge, copied payroll data of almost 100,000 staff and posted it online. Thousands sued Morrisons. The Supreme Court held Skelton acted on a personal vendetta, so Morrisons was not vicariously liable, clarifying limits of employer liability.
Hillas agreed to buy 22,000 standards of Russian softwood timber from Arcos with an option to purchase 100,000 standards the following year. When Arcos sold their entire 1931 output to another buyer, Hillas exercised the option. The House of Lords held the option clause created a binding contract despite its imprecise terms, as courts should give effect to commercial agreements.
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive
October 4, 2026
National Case Law Archive