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.
Upper Tribunal held the FTT unfairly misled the appellant about video evidence from abroad, set aside the decision, and remitted the case.
Stonegate Farmers Ltd v Chucks Farm Ltd [2026] EWHC 742 (Comm) (27 February 2026)
High Court ruled that an arbitrator breached fairness duties by deciding damages on an implied term not properly in play, and remitted the award for reconsideration.
The Upper Tribunal allowed a PIP appeal, set aside the First-tier Tribunal’s paper decision, and sent the case back for a fresh oral hearing.
Dilenardo & Anor, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1672 (18 December 2025)
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against a receivership order under POCA, rejecting complaints about representation, proportionality, tenant rights, and fresh evidence.
The Court of Appeal Criminal Division refused leave to appeal against a receivership order enforcing an unpaid confiscation order under POCA.
The Upper Tribunal allowed an ESA appeal, set aside the First-tier Tribunal decision, and remitted the case because inadequate reasons were given for deciding it on the papers.
The Circuit judge failed to conduct a proper examination and effective determination of Ground 1 of the appeal, which raised a jurisdictional issue regarding the power to grant mandatory injunctions against a tenant under section 9A of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. This amounted to a fundamental departure from correct procedure and a frustration of the judicial process, constituting jurisdictional error and denial of a fair hearing. Judicial review must be allowed and the refusal of permission to appeal quashed.
Source excerpt
Appeal dismissed from summary judgment and refusal of relief from sanctions in a flooding-loss claim against Thames Water.
The Upper Tribunal held that refusing remote participation from abroad denied the appellant a fair hearing and it set aside the First-tier Tribunal decision.
Explore more
