Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The EAT held that the tribunal wrongly refused Car Sales Solutions’ reconsideration application and remitted it to a different Employment Judge.
The application to amend to add ground 6 was refused because it was not made promptly within the statutory 14-day time limit after the claimant became aware of the relevant decision, resulting in significant delay.
Source excerpt
The Upper Tribunal dismissed an appeal against revocation of an operator’s licence and transport manager disqualification, rejecting claims of procedural unfairness, bias, and legal error.
The sentence was unlawful due to deprivation of effective legal representation and procedural impropriety; the correct sentence, accounting for mitigating and aggravating factors and proper plea discount, is 16 months' imprisonment, not suspended.
Source excerpt
Kiraly, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for Work And Pensions [2025] EWHC 3413 (Admin) (07 October 2025)
Permission for judicial review was refused in a Universal Credit and PIP challenge. The court held the Tribunal was an adequate alternative remedy and the issues were mainly factual.
The Defendant did not err in law in its interpretation of the development plan, its assessment of the bridge as a standalone project for EIA purposes, its advice to committee members, its handling of lobbying and site visits, its separation of powers arrangements, or its omission of the 2016 feasibility report; all grounds of challenge failed.
Source excerpt
LL & Anor, R (on the application of) v Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council [2025] EWHC 2380 (Admin) (19 September 2025)
The High Court quashed Trafford’s 2025-26 council tax reduction scheme, holding it was unlawfully adopted by the Executive Committee rather than full Council.
The grounds of appeal are sufficiently arguable to proceed to a full hearing, as there are credible contentions of legal misdirection, procedural irregularity, and erroneous exclusion of evidence and findings by the Employment Tribunal at the stage 2 equal value hearing.
Source excerpt
The nomination was valid as there was no evidence of any surplus held by the nominating group at the relevant time, and subsequent incorporation as a not-for-profit company confirmed compliance with the Regulations; procedural impropriety in notification did not cause prejudice or invalidate the decision.
Source excerpt
LS, R (On the Application Of) v Warrington Borough Council [2024] EWHC 2872 (Admin) (12 November 2024)
The claimant's evidence, taken at its highest, raises a genuine factual dispute about her age that could succeed at trial, meeting the threshold for permission. The procedural defect in the initial claim form was serious but not fatal; relief from sanctions is granted due to prompt amendment and absence of prejudice. Interim relief is justified due to clear evidence of harm to the claimant if treated as an adult, outweighing any prejudice to the defendant.
Source excerpt
Explore more
