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
Republic of Korea v Elliott Associates, LP [2025] EWCA Civ 905 (17 July 2025)
Court of Appeal held that Article 11.1(1) of the KORUS FTA limits the offer to arbitrate, so the tribunal’s jurisdiction was challengeable under section 67.
The Court of Appeal held that Article 11.1(1) of the KORUS FTA limits the treaty’s offer to arbitrate, so Korea’s section 67 challenge could proceed.
A claim only falls within Article 9(3) and (4) of the Aarhus Convention if the contravened national law is for the protection or regulation of the environment. Section 28 of the Taxation (Cross-Border Trade) Act 2018 is not such a provision; it is a general requirement to have regard to international arrangements. Breaches of public law principles in a non-environmental statutory context do not engage the Aarhus Convention. The claim is not an Aarhus Convention claim and does not attract costs protection under Part IX of CPR 46.
Source excerpt
HM Treasury & Anor v Global Feedback Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 624 (13 May 2025)
The Court of Appeal held that a judicial review about the UK-Australia trade regulations was not an Aarhus Convention claim because the law challenged was not environmental law.
The High Court held that India’s ratification of the New York Convention did not itself waive state immunity or submit India to English court jurisdiction.
CC/Devas (Mauritius) Ltd & Ors v Republic of India (Re State Immunity Act 1978 - Arbitration) [2025] EWHC 964 (Comm) (17 April 2025)
The High Court held that India’s ratification of the New York Convention did not itself waive state immunity or submit India to English jurisdiction under section 2(2) of the State Immunity Act 1978.
The Supreme Court held that payments linked to Buchan Field oil rights were not consideration for a 'right to work' under the UK/Canada tax treaty.
The appellant was not married to an EU national and residing in the UK as a spouse before the end of the transition period. The Withdrawal Agreement does not confer residence rights on those who marry after the transition period, regardless of the reasons for delay. Proportionality and fairness do not extend the scope of the Agreement. The evidential requirements for durable partners are not discriminatory in the appellant's circumstances. The appeal is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Celik v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 921 (31 July 2023)
The Court of Appeal held that a Turkish appellant who married an EU national after the transition period ended could not rely on the Withdrawal Agreement for residence rights.
Royal Bank of Canada v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs [2023] EWCA Civ 695 (21 June 2023)
The Court of Appeal held that RBC’s payments were not taxable in the UK under the Canada treaty, and allowed the appeal.
Explore more
