[1] This is a complete list of the judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom between the court's opening on 1 October 2009 and the end of that year. Most of the cases were heard in the House of Lords before judgments were given in the new Supreme Court. The court heard 17 cases during this time; they are listed in order of each case's Neutral citation number.
The table lists judgments made by the court and the opinions of the judges in each case. Judges are treated as having concurred in another's judgment when they either formally attach themselves to the judgment of another or speak only to acknowledge their concurrence with one or more judges. Any judgment which reaches a conclusion which differs from the majority on one or more major points of the appeal has been treated as dissent.
Because every judge in the court is entitled to hand down a judgment, it is not uncommon for groups of judges to reach the same conclusion (i.e. whether to allow or dismiss the appeal) in materially different ways, for example if a panel of 9 judges heard a case with 4 judges dismissing the appeal, 3 finding for the appellant on one point and 2 on another - the table should show 5 judges as the majority and the 4 judges who actually held the more mainstream view as dissenting. The table also does not reflect how significantly judges differed, or how much of a contribution a particular judge made to the overall judgment.
Delivered a judgment (majority) | Concurred in the judgment of another justice (majority) | Delivered a judgment (dissenting) | Concurred in the judgment of another justice (dissent) | Did not participate in the decision | ||||||||||
Case name | Citation | Argued | Decided | Phillips | Hope | Saville | Rodger | Walker | Hale | Brown | Mance | Collins | Kerr | Clarke | Judge [lower-alpha 1] | Neuberger [lower-alpha 1] | Scott [lower-alpha 1] |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
R (E) v JFS [lower-alpha 2] | [2009] UKSC 1 | 1 October | 14 October | ||||||||||||||
Re Sigma Finance | [2009] UKSC 2 | 1–2 July | 29 October | ||||||||||||||
R (L) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis | [2009] UKSC 3 | 13–14 July | 29 October | ||||||||||||||
Louca v Germany | [2009] UKSC 4 | 29 July | 19 November | ||||||||||||||
Re B (a child) | [2009] UKSC 5 | 14 October | 19 November | ||||||||||||||
OFT v Abbey National | [2009] UKSC 6 | 23–25 June | 25 November | ||||||||||||||
PE (Cameroon) v Home Secretary | [2009] UKSC 7 | 30 July | 26 November | ||||||||||||||
R (A) v Croydon | [2009] UKSC 8 | 20–23 July | 26 November | ||||||||||||||
R (Barclay) v Justice Secretary | [2009] UKSC 9 | 15–16 July | 1 December | ||||||||||||||
I (A Child) | [2009] UKSC 10 | 10–11 June | 1 December | ||||||||||||||
Environment Secretary v Meier & Ors | [2009] UKSC 11 | 10–11 June | 1 December | ||||||||||||||
R(A) v B | [2009] UKSC 12 | 10–11 June | 1 December | ||||||||||||||
Barratt Homes Ltd v Welsh Water | [2009] UKSC 13 | 27–28 July | 9 December | ||||||||||||||
R v Horncastle [lower-alpha 3] | [2009] UKSC 14 | 7–9 July | 9 December | ||||||||||||||
R (E) v JFS [lower-alpha 4] | [2009] UKSC 15 | 27–29 October | 16 December | ||||||||||||||
Mahad (Ethiopia) v Entry Clearance Officer [lower-alpha 3] | [2009] UKSC 16 | 9–11 November | 16 December | ||||||||||||||
Re S-B (Children) | [2009] UKSC 17 | 25–26 November | 14 December |
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) is the highest court of appeal for the Crown Dependencies, the British Overseas Territories, some Commonwealth countries and a few institutions in the United Kingdom. Established on 14 August 1833 to hear appeals formerly heard by the King-in-Council, the Privy Council formerly acted as the court of last resort for the entire British Empire, other than for the United Kingdom itself.
Whilst the House of Lords of the United Kingdom is the upper chamber of Parliament and has government ministers, for many centuries it had a judicial function. It functioned as a court of first instance for the trials of peers and for impeachments, and as a court of last resort in the United Kingdom and prior, the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of England.
The Court of Appeal is the highest court within the Senior Courts of England and Wales, and second in the legal system of England and Wales only to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The Court of Appeal was created in 1875, and today comprises 39 Lord Justices of Appeal and Lady Justices of Appeal.
In law, an en banc session is when all the judges of a court sit to hear a case, not just one judge or a smaller panel of judges. For courts like the United States Courts of Appeals in which each case is heard by a three-judge panel instead of the entire court, en banc review is usually used only for unusually complex or important cases or when the court believes there is an especially significant issue at stake. En banc is a French phrase meaning "in bench".
The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is the final court of appeal in the United Kingdom for all civil cases, and for criminal cases originating in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. As the United Kingdom’s highest appellate court for these matters, it hears cases of the greatest public or constitutional importance affecting the whole population.
The Caribbean Court of Justice is the judicial institution of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Established in 2005, it is based in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago.
The judicial system of Israel consists of secular courts and religious courts. The law courts constitute a separate and independent unit of Israel's Ministry of Justice. The system is headed by the President of the Supreme Court and the Minister of Justice.
The procedures of the Supreme Court of Canada for hearing cases is established in the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada, the Supreme Court Act, and by tradition.
A full court is a court of law sitting with a greater than normal number of judges. For a court which is usually presided over by one judge, a full court has three or more judges; for a court which, like many appellate courts, normally sits as a bench of three judges, a full court has a bench of five judges.
The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) was a nonprofit organization active in the United States from 2009 through 2015. The organization was established to support the plaintiffs in Hollingsworth v. Perry, a federal lawsuit challenging California's Proposition 8 under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. AFER retained former United States Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson and David Boies to lead the legal team representing the plaintiffs challenging Proposition 8.
This is a list of the judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in 2010 and statistics associated thereupon. Since the Supreme Court began its work on 1 October 2009, this year was its first full year of operation. In total, 58 cases were heard in 2010.
This is a list of the judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the year 2011. They are ordered by Neutral citation.
R v Horncastle & Others[2009] UKSC 14 was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom regarding hearsay evidence and the compatibility of UK hearsay law with the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The case represents another stage in the judicial dialogue between the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the higher courts of the United Kingdom about whether it is acceptable to base convictions "solely or to a decisive extent" on evidence made by a witness who is identified but does not appear in court.
Regina v Armel Gnango[2011] UKSC 59 is the leading English criminal law case on the interaction of joint enterprise, transferred malice, and exemption from criminal liability where a party to what would normally be a crime is the victim of it. The Supreme Court held, restoring Gnango's conviction for the murder of Magda Pniewska, that he was guilty of murder notwithstanding the fact that he had not fired the shot which killed Pniewska during the shoot out which led to her death, and that the fatal shot had been fired by his opponent in an attempt to kill him. The judgment of the Supreme Court has been criticised over the alleged extent to which it was designed to mollify public opinion, and in the context of debates over the nature of the doctrine of joint enterprise.
This is a list of the judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the year 2014. They are ordered by neutral citation.
This is a list of the judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the year 2015 as of 8 August. So far 57 cases have been decided and these are ordered by neutral citation.
This is a list of the judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the year 2012. They are ordered by Neutral citation.
This is a list of the 81 judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the year 2013. They are ordered by neutral citation.
This is a list of the judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the year 2016. 65 cases were decided and these are ordered by neutral citation.
This is a list of the judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the year 2017. 5 cases have been decided as of 25 January 2017 and these are ordered by neutral citation.