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
Permission for judicial review was refused in a challenge to a local authority risk assessment about whether a toilet should remain in an adapted wet room.
GBK & Anor v Ceredigion County Council [2026] EWHC 1213 (Admin) (20 May 2026)
On an oral renewal for judicial review, the High Court refused permission over a council wet-room adaptation dispute and found no arguable public law flaw.
Appeal dismissed. The Tribunal upheld Ofsted’s cancellation of a childminder’s registration after repeated failures to notify significant events and assess safeguarding risk.
Family court judgment on child arrangements after findings that the father repeatedly viewed prohibited child sexual abuse images, with differing contact orders for each child.
AB v BB [2026] EWFC 111 (B) (07 May 2026)
Family court case about child arrangements where the father’s repeated viewing of prohibited child sexual abuse imagery led to supervised contact for DB and gradual unsupervised contact for CB.
Bernard, Application for Reconsideration [2026] PBRA 90 (28 April 2026)
The Parole Board refused Bernard’s application for reconsideration, finding no irrationality, procedural unfairness, or error of law in the panel’s refusal to direct release.
Hodgson, Application for Reconsideration [2026] PBRA 88 (28 April 2026)
The Parole Board refused Hodgson’s application to reconsider a decision not to direct release, finding no irrationality, error of law, or material factual error.
Kuabaib, Application for Reconsideration [2026] PBRA 81 (27 April 2026)
The Parole Board refused reconsideration of a decision not to release Khubaib, holding the panel’s reasons were adequate and the risk assessment was rational.
The Court of Appeal dismissed Kevan Thakrar’s challenge to prolonged CSC segregation, holding there was no Article 3 breach, the Article 8 interference was justified, and no Article 14 discrimination.
Aslam, Application for Reconsideration [2026] PBRA 78 (14 April 2026)
The Parole Board refused Aslam’s reconsideration application, finding no irrationality, procedural unfairness, or error of law in the panel’s refusal to direct release.
Explore more
