Home > Legal Opinions tagged Supreme Court

  • clarification of the illegality defence?

    Gordon Monaghan

    The Supreme Court saw an opportunity to clarify the law surrounding ex turpi causa in its recent decision of Jetivia SA & Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd (In Liquidation) & Ors. This area of law has been in a state of confusion since the controversial House of Lords decision in Stone & Rolls Ltd v […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • strength of a parties' case not relevant to case management decisions

    Melanie Chisnall

    The Supreme Court has held in HRH Prince Abdulaziz Bin Mishal Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud v Apex Global Management Ltd & Another that in case management directions or decisions, the strength of a parties’ case would not be relevant to that decision or imposition of any sanctions. The court stated that the decision of the […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Supreme Court finds illegality does not stop discrimination claim

    Rachel Billen

    Mary Hounga entered the UK dishonestly on a visitor’s visa, with no right to work in this country. She was subjected to violence by her employer and subsequently brought a claim of race discrimination. At the Court of Appeal, it was found that the illegality of the contract of employment formed a material part of […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Supreme Court‘s decision handed down– Aintree University Hospitals...

    Ben Troke

    Today the Supreme Court decided that the Court of Appeal had been right to decide that it was lawful to allow a critically ill man to die, rather than order a hospital to provide treatment that the doctors thought was not in his best interests. But though the outcome was right, as Mr James was […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Supreme Court judgment could fix local authorities and others with...

    Sarah Erwin-Jones

    This tragic case led to a decision that could have very wide implications for those who have responsibilities for the vulnerable. This includes all schoolchildren. The claim against Essex County Council arose not because its employees were negligent, but because a lifeguard and swimming teacher allegedly were. They did not have insurance to meet the claim, […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Teaching assistants’ success in equal pay claims

    Emma Fox

    Female workers in schools can compare themselves to local authority grounds men, refuse workers and leisure attendants when bringing an equal pay claim, following a landmark decision by the Supreme Court. The case turned on whether the workers could be held to be ‘in the same employment’, despite being employed on different terms and conditions […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Supreme Court shows its bottle in Schutz case

    A person infringes a patent for a particular product if he ‘makes’ the product without the consent of the patentee. In Schutz v Werit the relevant ‘making’ involved replacing an old or damaged component vitally important to the function of the patent but not the subject of the patent itself. At first instance Floyd J […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Residential service charges and the duty to consult

    The Supreme Court has granted a landlord dispensation from the service charge consultation requirements (the ‘Requirements’) contained in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. Under this Act, unless dispensation is granted, a residential landlord who fails to comply with the Requirements cannot recover more than £250 from each tenant. In this case, although the cost […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Air pollution judgment could cause EU/UK shake-up

    Dmitrije Sirovica

    A Supreme Court case this week, dubbed one of the most important so far this century, could potentially decide who controls British environmental legislation. The case pits the European Commission against the national courts as to whether the Commission has sole responsibility when there is a breach of legislation originating from Brussels or whether the […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Pension case for part-time judges clears final hurdle – Supreme Co...

    The Supreme Court, in O’Brien v Ministry of Justice, has today ruled that part-time judges are entitled to the same pension, pro rata, as full-time judges. Until now, full-time judges receive a judicial pension while part-time judges do not. The pension, as the Ministry of Justice acknowledged, is a significant part of a judge’s remuneration. […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Theresa May to challenge Court of Appeal on CRBs

    Dai Durbridge

    This week the Court of Appeal said what many of us thought – disclosing every conviction on a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check without any consideration of relevance is unlawful. Regardless, the Home Secretary seems intent on appealing the decision to the Supreme Court. In my view, she faces an uphill task. Three senior judges reached this decision […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • P2P Filesharing – appeal court orders O2 to disclose more names

    Giles Parsons

    Golden Eye was licensed on terms to bring copyright infringement proceedings against people alleged to have shared pornographic works. The High Court  did not find this agreement illegal but refused to order O2 to disclose alleged filesharers’ identities as that would ‘endorse’ the agreement, and be ‘tantamount to… sanctioning the sale of the Intended Defendants’ privacy and data protection rights’. The […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Will Local Authority outsourcing always result in a non-delegable ...

    Sarah Erwin-Jones

    The answer is, of course “no” but we know that claimant lawyers acting for sometimes tragically injured clients see local authorities as being fair game. A case in point concerns a child who suffered brain damage in a swimming accident. The Supreme Court will be considering whether the Council who engaged the contractor to give […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Preliminary victory for Mr O’Brien – what next for Part Time Judic...

    On 4 July a Supreme Court hearing took place to consider whether Mr O’Brien’s relationship with the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is not substantially different to that of a typical ‘employer’ / ‘worker’ relationship. This week, the Court gave a preliminary ruling that Mr O’Brien is a ‘worker’. This signifies a major step towards achieving […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Public resources and the “postcode lottery”

    Ben Troke

    In the most significant community care case for a generation, a profoundly disabled young man (KM) has failed in his claim that Cambridgeshire County Council’s decision about the level of care was irrational, but the Supreme Court clarified that a local authority cannot take its own (limited) resources into account when assessing a person’s level […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Mandatory Retirement Policies Judged Acceptable – In Some Cases

    The Supreme Court’s judgment in Seldon v Clarkson Wright and Jakes concerns the scope for justifying a mandatory retirement age for partners. Unless justified, mandatory retirement would be direct discrimination because of age. Although Mr Seldon’s appeal was dismissed, this doesn’t give employers the green light to enforce retirement; employers still have to ensure that […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Supreme Court ruling brings clarity to employers’ liability ...

    Steven Conway

    The Supreme Court has ruled  that insurers on risk at the time of exposure to asbestos are liable to pay out on their employer’s liability (EL) policies. Insurers in run-off or provisional liquidation argued their specific EL contract wording meant that the policy in force at the time of exposure should not respond; it should […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Court delivers client money bombshell in Lehman case

    The Supreme Court has confirmed that investment firms hold client money on trust from the moment of receipt and not at the time the money is put into a segregated client account. Should a firm fail, all client monies held should be pooled for distribution to clients. The Court’s decision, which clarifies the application of the […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Claims danger following ‘right to life’ ruling

    Neil Ward

    The Supreme Court has reversed a decision of the Court of Appeal in finding the state owes a positive duty to protect life to informal mental health patients. The case of Rabone v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust concerns the tragic suicide of Melanie Rabone whilst on home leave from a psychiatric hospital. Her family […]

    Read our legal opinion.

  • Judicial pension rights – O’Brien and the Advocate General’s...

    Edward Benson

    Whilst the final judgement is not anticipated until early 2012, Advocate General Kokott has now delivered her opinion. Mr O’Brien, represented by Browne Jacobson LLP and Cloisters Chambers, brought a claim because, as a part-time, fee-paid judge, he was excluded from the judicial pension scheme. In July 2010 the Supreme Court sought ECJ input on:- […]

    Read our legal opinion.


  • 2015 (117)
  • 2014 (299)
  • 2013 (374)
  • 2012 (469)
  • 2011 (421)
  • 2010 (226)
  • 2009 (32)


Opinions tagged as...

Sarah Erwin-Jones education Social Care government Public Sector DfE Intellectual Property Nichola Evans trade marks schools free schools child protection Laura Richards Claims academies Richard Nicholas advertising Browne Jacobson Browne Jacobson LLP Fiona Carter litigation Hayley Roberts Ofsted Mark Blois James Arrowsmith insurance Richard Freeth adult safeguarding High Court teachers NHS local authorities personal injury Gemma Steele Dai Durbridge Department for Education Court of Appeal copyright Brands employment