Share it

Hearings in the Supreme Court are now shown live on the Court’s website.

On Monday 10 April until Tuesday 11 6 April, the Supreme Court will hear the appeal of Arcadia Petroleum Ltd & Ors v Bosworth & Anor. This will consider whether a claim pleaded in conspiracy in respect of conduct which could be pleaded as breach of a defendant’s contract of employment (and was actually so pleaded) falls within the Lugano Convention, art 18, and what the correct test is to determine whether a claim against an employee, which could be pleaded in contract, tort or some other legal categorisation, falls within s 5 of the Convention. The case will also consider whether, in circumstances where the Respondents are a group of companies to which the appellants provided services in exchange for remuneration, each Respondent entity is to be treated as an ‘employer’ for the jurisdictional purposes of the Convention, or if the claims of other companies in the group are to be treated as matters ‘relating to individual contracts of employment’. This will be heard in Courtroom 2.

On Tuesday 11 April, the Supreme Court will hand down the judgment in the case of Commissioners for HMRC v Investment Trust Companies. The hand down panel will be Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed and Lord Hodge. This appeal considered whether the claimants have a direct mistake-based action in unjust enrichment against the defendant on the basis that the defendant was enriched at the claimant’s expense by the mistaken payment of VAT, and whether the claimants’ cause of action against HMRC in unjust enrichment for the recovery of VAT was excluded by the Value Added Tax Act 1994, s 80(7). The appeal also considered, subject to the foregoing, the extent to which the defendant had been enriched by the mistaken payment of VAT.

On Tuesday 11 April, the Supreme Court will hand down the judgment in the case of SXH v The CPS. The hand down panel will be Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed and Lord Hodge. This appeal considered whether the appellant’s entry into the UK as an asylum seeker and the decision to prosecute her for entering with false travel documentation engaged ECHR, art 8. It also considered what the appropriate threshold is for engaging art 8, and whether the decision to prosecute was disproportionate.

On Tuesday 11 April, the Supreme Court will hand down the judgment in the case of McCann v The State Hospitals Board for Scotland. The hand down panel will be Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed and Lord Hodge. This appeal considered whether the respondent’s smoking ban infringed the appellant’s rights under ECHR, arts 8 and 14, and whether the smoking ban needed to comply, and did comply, with the principles set out in the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, s 1, which include the patient’s wishes and feelings.

On Tuesday 11 April, the Supreme Court will hand down the judgment in the case of Lowick Rose LLP (in liquidation) v Swynson Ltd & Anor. The hand down panel will be Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed and Lord Hodge. This appeal considered whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that a lender could recover damages from its negligent adviser representing loans that had been repaid by the borrower, on the basis that the borrower’s repayments were collateral to (or res inter alios acta) the adviser’s breach of contract.

On Tuesday 11 April, the Supreme Court will hand down the judgment in the cases of Times Newspapers Ltd v Flood; Miller v Associated Newspapers Ltd; and Frost & Ors v MGN Ltd. The hand down panel will be Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed and Lord Hodge. These appeals considered whether having to pay the entire costs of the other side, including success fees and insurance premiums arising from a Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA), in a libel case in which it was party successful violated the defendant’s ECHR, arts 6 and 10 rights, and whether costs orders made in defamation proceedings requiring the defendant to pay the claimant’s success fees and after-the-event (ATE) insurance premium are incompatible with the defendant’s art 10 rights. The appeals also considered whether, if the recoverability of additional liabilities (CFA success fees and ATE premiums) is incompatible with art 10 rights, the defendants should be precluded from arguing that this is the case in the set of representative claims.

On Tuesday 11 April, the Supreme Court will hand down the judgment in the case of Nuclear Decommissioning Authority v Energy Solutions EU Ltd (now called ATK Energy EU Ltd). The hand down panel will be Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed and Lord Hodge. This appeal considered whether, in a claim for damages under the Public Contracts Regulations 2006, the Francovich condition that the infringement be ‘sufficiently serious’ must be met, and whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the respondent’s failure to issue proceedings before the contract was concluded did not break the chain of causation between the breach and the loss.

A full list of the cases scheduled for the Hilary term can be found here.

The following Supreme Court judgments remain outstanding:

Asset Land Investment Plc & Anor v The Financial Conduct Authority, heard 13–14 January 2016.

The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd & Ors, heard 21 January 2016.

Mohammed & Ors v Ministry of Defence & Anor, heard 9–10 May.

Commissioners for the HMRC v The Investment Trust Companies (in liquidation) & Ors, heard 17–19 May 2016.

SXH v Crown Prosecution Service, heard 19 July 2016.

McCann v The State Hospital Board for Scotland (Scotland), heard 11-12 October 2016.

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc v Lomas & Ors and other cases, heard 17-20 October 2016.

Mohammed & Ors v Ministry of Defence, heard 25-27 October 2016.

China National Chartering Company Ltd v Gard Marine and Energy Ltd & Anor, Gard Marine and Entergy Ltd  v China National Chartering Company Ltd & Anor, and Daiichi Chuo Kisen Kaisha v Gard Marine and Energy Ltd & Anor, heard 1-3 November 2016.

R (A) (a Child) (by her litigation friend B) v Secretary of State for Health, heard 2 November 2016.

PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd & Ors, heard 17 Jan 2017.

Times Newspaper Ltd v Flood; Miller v Associated Newspapers Ltd; Frost & Ors v MGN Ltd, heard 24-26 January 2017.

Hartley & Ors v King Edward VI College, heard 1 February 2017.

Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council, heard 8-9 February 2017.

Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, heard 14 February 2017.

R (Kiarie) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (Byndloss) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 15-16 February 2017.

R (Coll) v Secretary of State for Justice, heard 21 Feb 2017.

Suffolk Coastal District Council v Hopkins Homes & Anor; Richborough Estate Partnership LLP & Anor v Cheshire East Borough Council, heard 22 and 23 Feb 2017.

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority v Energy Solutions EU Ltd (now called ATK Energy EU Ltd), heard on 1-2 Mar 2017.

Lord Advocate (representing the Taiwanese Judicial Authorities & Anor) v Dean (Scotland), heard on 6 Mar 2017.

Keefe (by his litigation friend Eyton) v Hoteles Pinero Canarias SL, heard 7 Mar 2017.

Miller & Ors v Ministory of Justice; O’Brien v Ministry of Justice; and Walker v Innospec Ltd & Ors, heard 8-9 Mar 2017.

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v DSD & Anor, heard 13-14 Mar 2017.

RFC 2012 Plc (in liquidation) (formerly The Rangers Football Club Plc) v Advocate General for Scotland (Scotland), heard 15-16 Mar 2017.

Taurus Petroleum Ltd v State Oil Marketing Company of the Ministry of Oil, Republic of Iraq (SOMO), heard 21-23 Mar 2017.

SM (Algeria) v Entry Clearance Officer UK Visa Section, heard 23 Mar 2017.

R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor, heard 27-28 Mar 2017.

Eli Lilly & Co v Actavis UK Ltd & Ors, heard 4-6 Apr 2017.