2014 Judgments of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Last updated

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.

Contents

In 2014 Lord Neuberger was the President of the Supreme Court, Lady Hale was the Deputy President.

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 that differs from the majority on one or more major points of the appeal has been treated as dissent.

All dates are for 2014 unless expressly stated otherwise.

Table key


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

2014 judgments

Case nameCitationArguedDecided Neuberger Hale Mance Kerr Clarke Wilson Sumption Reed Carnwath Hughes Toulson Hodge
Re LC (Children) [2014] UKSC 111 November 201315 January
Marley v Rawlings [2014] UKSC 23 December 201322 January
R (HS2 Action Alliance Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport [1] [2014] UKSC 315-16 October 201322 January
Re an application of Raymond Brownlee for Judicial Review [2014] UKSC 45 December 201329 January
R v Mackle (Nos. 1, 2 and 3), and R v McLaughlin [2014] UKSC 511 December 201329 January
I.A. v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 626 November 201329 January
Adamson v Paddico (267) Ltd [2014] UKSC 715 January5 February
Richardson v DPP [2014] UKSC 812 November 20135 February
Cramaso LLP v Ogilvie-Grant, Earl of Seafield [2014] UKSC 918-19 November 201312 February
Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria [2014] UKSC 104-5 November 201319 February
Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Marks and Spencer plc [2014] UKSC 1125-26 November 201319 February
R (EM (Eritrea)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 126-7 November 201319 February
Coventry v Lawrence [2014] UKSC 1312-14 November 201326 February
Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Forde and McHugh Ltd [2014] UKSC 1416 January26 February
Stott v Thomas Cook Tour Operators Ltd [2014] UKSC 1520 November 20135 March
Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs v Secret Hotels2 Ltd (formerly Med Hotels Ltd) [2014] UKSC 1629-30 January5 March
R (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2014] UKSC 173 December 201312 March
Dunhill v Burgin [2] [2014] UKSC 183-5 February12 March
P v v Cheshire West and Chester Council [1] [3] [2014] UKSC 1921-23 October 201319 March
Kennedy v The Charity Commission [1] [2014] UKSC 2029 & 31 October 201326 March
Durkin v DSG Retail Ltd [2014] UKSC 2128 January26 March
Cox v Ergo Versicherung AG (formerly known as Victoria) [2014] UKSC 2220-21 January2 April
R v O'Brien [2014] UKSC 235 December 20132 April
British Telecommunications plc v Telefónica O2 Ltd [2014] UKSC 243-4 February9 April
A v British Broadcasting Corporation [2014] UKSC 2522-23 January8 May
Barnes v The Eastenders Group [2014] UKSC 2624-25 February8 May
L Batley Pet Products Ltd v North Lanarkshire Councilt [2014] UKSC 2717 March8 May
R (Fitzroy George) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 284 March14 May
Re K (A Child) [2014] UKSC 298 April15 May
Secretary of State for Home Department v MN and KY [2014] UKSC 305-6 March21 May
R (Barkas) v North Yorkshire County Council [2014] UKSC 312 April21 May
Clyde & Co LLP v Winkelhof [2014] UKSC 3224-25 March21 May
Khaira v Shergill [2014] UKSC 3319-20 February11 June
R (Eastenders Cash and Carry plc) v The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs [2014] UKSC 3427-28 November 201311 June
R (T) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 359-10 December 201318 June
R v Ahmad [2014] UKSC 3610-11 February18 June
R (Nunn) v Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary [2014] UKSC 3713 March18 June
R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice [4] [5] [2014] UKSC 3816-19 December 201325 June
R (Whiston) v Secretary of State for Justice [2014] UKSC 3926 March2 July
The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v United Utilities Water plc [2014] UKSC 406-7 May2 July
Henderson v Foxworth Investments Ltd [2014] UKSC 4114 May2 July
British Telecommunications plc v Telefónica O2 Ltd [2014] UKSC 423-4 February9 July
Agricultural Sector (Wales) Bill - Reference by the Attorney General for England and Wales [6] [2014] UKSC 4317-18 February9 July
R (Sandiford) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2014] UKSC 444 June16 July
FHR European Ventures LLP v Cedar Capital Partners LLC [1] [7] [2014] UKSC 4517-19 June16 July
Coventry v Lawrence (No. 2) [2014] UKSC 4612 May23 July
Hounga v Allen [2014] UKSC 4731 March-1 April30 July
David T Morrison & Co Ltd v ICL Plastics Ltd [2014] UKSC 487 April30 July
Healthcare at Home Ltd v The Common Services Agency [2014] UKSC 4923 June30 July
Robertson v Swift [2014] UKSC 5019 March9 September
Marley v Rawlings (Costs) [2014] UKSC 513 December 201318 September
Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages Ltd [8] [2014] UKSC 523-4 March22 October
McDonald v National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc [9] [2014] UKSC 5312-13 February22 October
R (Barclay) v Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor [2014] UKSC 5430 June22 October
Les Laboratoires Servier v Apotex Inc [2014] UKSC 5510 June29 October
R (Moseley) v London Borough of Haringey [2014] UKSC 5619 June29 October
Telchadder v Wickland Holdings Ltd [2014] UKSC 571 May5 November
AIB Group (UK) v Mark Redler & Co Solicitors [2014] UKSC 585 June5 November
VB v Westminster Magistrates' Court [2014] UKSC 5911-12 June5 November
R (Lord Carlile of Berriew QC) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] UKSC 6013 May12 November
Plevin v Paragon Personal Finance Ltd [2014] UKSC 6111-12 June12 November
R (ZH and CN) v London Borough of Newham and London Borough of Lewisham [1] [2014] UKSC 6223-24 & 26 June12 November
Sims v Dacorum Borough Council [1] [2014] UKSC 6323-24 & 26 June12 November
HRH Prince Abdulaziz Bin Mishal Bin Abdulaziz v Apex Global Management Ltd [2014] UKSC 6413 October26 November
Loveridge v Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Lambeth [2014] UKSC 6521 October3 December
R (Haney, Kaiyam & Massey) v Secretary of State for Justice [10] [2014] UKSC 6619-21 May10 December
Moohan v The Lord Advocate [1] [2014] UKSC 6724 July17 December
Greater Glasgow Health Board v Doogan [2014] UKSC 6811 November17 December

Notes

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 An augmented panel of 7 judges sat in this case.
  2. The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He agreed with the majority.
  3. The chart shows the judgment of the court in the case of P. Two other appeals (from MIG and MEG) were held concurrently and allowed by a majority of 4 to 3 (Lords Clarke, Carnwath and Hodge dissenting).
  4. An augmented panel of 9 judges sat in this case
  5. The chart shows the judgment by the court in the appeals by Nicklinson and Lamb. It also unanimously allowed an appeal by the DPP and dismissed a cross-appeal by Martin.
  6. Lord Thomas also sat on this case. He gave the lead judgment alongside Lord Reed.
  7. Lord Collins also sat on this case. He agreed with the majority.
  8. Lord Collins also sat on this case. He gave a judgment for the majority that Lord Sumption agreed with.
  9. The chart shows the decision for the appeal. The decision on the cross-appeal was by a majority of four to one (Lady Hale dissenting).
  10. The chart shows the judgment of the court in the appeal of Haney, Kaiyam and Massey. The article 5 appeal by Robinson was dismissed by a majority of four to one (Lord Mance dissenting).

Related Research Articles

Obiter dictum is a Latin phrase meaning "other things said", that is, a remark in a legal opinion that is "said in passing" by any judge or arbitrator. It is a concept derived from English common law, whereby a judgment comprises only two elements: ratio decidendi and obiter dicta. For the purposes of judicial precedent, ratio decidendi is binding, whereas obiter dicta are persuasive only.

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court ruling that a prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge in a criminal case—the dismissal of jurors without stating a valid cause for doing so—may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race. The Court ruled that this practice violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case gave rise to the term Batson challenge, an objection to a peremptory challenge based on the standard established by the Supreme Court's decision in this case. Subsequent jurisprudence has resulted in the extension of Batson to civil cases and cases where jurors are excluded on the basis of sex.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Procedures of the Supreme Court of Canada</span>

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 judicial opinion is a form of legal opinion written by a judge or a judicial panel in the course of resolving a legal dispute, providing the decision reached to resolve the dispute, and usually indicating the facts which led to the dispute and an analysis of the law used to arrive at the decision.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Robert Reed, Baron Reed of Allermuir</span> President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Robert John Reed, Baron Reed of Allermuir, is a British judge who has been President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom since January 2020. He was the principal judge in the Commercial Court in Scotland before being promoted to the Inner House of the Court of Session in 2008. He is an authority on human rights law in Scotland and elsewhere; he served as one of the UK's ad hoc judges at the European Court of Human Rights. He was also a Non-Permanent Judge of the Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong.

<i>Re Sigma Finance Corp</i> UK legal case

Re Sigma Finance Corporation[2009] UKSC 2 is an English contract law case and the first substantive decision in the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom concerning principles of interpretation. Lord Walker said although he "was one of those who gave permission for a further appeal I find, on closer consideration, that the case involves no issue of general public importance."

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.

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.

<i>Jones v Kaney</i> 2011 UK Supreme Court judgment

Jones v Kaney [2011] UKSC 13 is a 2011 decision of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on whether expert witnesses retained by a party in litigation can be sued for professional negligence in England and Wales, or whether they have the benefit of immunity from suit. The case involved a psychologist (Kaney) instructed as an expert witness in a personal injury claim, who was said to have negligently signed a statement of matters agreed with the expert instructed by the opposing side, in which she made a number of concessions that weakened the claim considerably. As a result, according to the injured claimant (Jones), he had to settle the claim for much less than he would have obtained had his expert not been careless. To succeed in the claim, he had to overturn an earlier Court of Appeal decision that had decided that preparation of a joint statement with the other side's expert was covered by immunity from suit. Kaney therefore succeeded in getting the claim struck out before trial on an application heard by Mr Justice Blake in the High Court of Justice. The judge issued a certificate allowing the claimant to "leapfrog" the Court of Appeal and go straight to the Supreme Court to appeal against his decision.

<i>R v Gnango</i> British legal case

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.

<i>Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs v Rahmatullah</i>

Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs v Yunus Rahmatullah [2012] UKSC 48 is a UK constitutional law case concerning the detention of Yunus Rahmatullah, a Pakistani citizen detained in Iraq, and later Afghanistan, who is alleged to have travelled to Iraq to fight for Al-Qaeda during the Second Iraq War.

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.

<i>R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice</i> Case brought before UK Supreme Court regarding the right to die in English law.

R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice was a 2014 judgment by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom that considered the question of the right to die in English law.

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.

<i>Re B</i> (A Child)

Re B (A Child) or In the matter of B (A child) [2016] UKSC 4 was a 2016 judgment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom concerning the habitual residence of a child under English law.

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.

Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States on the status of administrative law judges of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Court held that they are considered inferior officers of the United States and so are subject to the Appointments Clause and must be appointed through the President or other delegated officer of the United States, rather than hired. As "inferior" officers, their appointments are not subject to the Senate's advice and consent role.