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
Quantum judgment in admitted clinical negligence claim: the court held a neuro-rehabilitation unit was the reasonable future care option and assessed the lost years claim using ASHE averages, a 50% living-expenses deduction and retirement at 70.
The Divisional Court held that open justice applied to a DPA judgment and upheld publication of the claimant’s name despite his acquittal.
The court lacks jurisdiction over Medium Rare NV and Kick Streaming Pty Limited under s.10 Defamation Act 2013 because they are not authors, editors, or publishers of the statements complained of, and it was reasonably practicable for the Claimant to proceed against the First Defendant, who is fully engaged in the proceedings. The Claimant's notifications to the Third Defendant were too vague to fix it with knowledge of defamatory publication. The First Defendant is entitled to anonymity due to credible threats and a history of pseudonymity. The Claimant's applications to amend the Second Def…
Source excerpt
Discharging the Transparency Order would constitute a disproportionate breach of JF’s Article 8 rights to privacy, given the highly sensitive nature of the information before the court, her ongoing vulnerability, and the continuing court proceedings regarding her care and deprivation of liberty. The interference with EF’s Article 10 rights is justified and necessary to protect JF’s rights. No less intrusive measure was proposed or found workable. The Transparency Order remains necessary and proportionate for the protection of JF.
Source excerpt
RKV v JWC [2025] EWFC 429 (B) (05 December 2025)
The Family Court awarded indemnity costs against the respondent for serious litigation misconduct, and ordered him to pay costs of the costs application too.
The appeal was struck out because the appellant failed to comply with case management directions that expressly warned non-compliance could result in strike out, and did not address the jurisdictional issue or make an application for anonymity as instructed.
Source excerpt
Stedman v SYZTMZ & Ors [2025] EWHC 3285 (KB) (17 November 2025)
The High Court addressed anonymity, amendment, and jurisdiction in a defamation case about Kick streams, dismissing the claim against the second and third defendants.
There was no breach of duty by prosecution or defence; all reasonable lines of inquiry were pursued, tactical decisions by counsel were tenable, and no material was withheld or omitted that would have rendered the conviction unsafe. The appeal fails as there is no real possibility the suggested lines of questioning would have resulted in a different outcome.
Source excerpt
QX, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1463 (21 October 2025)
The Court of Appeal quashed QX’s convictions for breaching a Temporary Exclusion Order after that order was quashed ab initio under the statutory appeal scheme.
Gardner (Deceased), Re (Duration of Transparency Order) [2025] EWCOP 34 (T3) (24 September 2025)
The Court of Protection refused to extend a transparency order after Carl Gardner’s death, holding that open justice and Article 10 outweighed the family’s privacy concerns.
Explore more
