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 Upper Tribunal held that dip pots in a takeaway meal deal are separate zero-rated supplies, and allowed Queenscourt’s VAT appeal.
EBA, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Defence & Anor [2026] EWHC 1131 (Admin) (13 May 2026)
The High Court dismissed a judicial review challenging the ARAP scheme’s closure without notice and the refusal to accept a post-closure application.
The High Court held that closing the ARAP scheme without notice was lawful, rejecting claims of unfairness, legitimate expectation, irrationality and fettered discretion.
Martin & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Chancellor of the Exchequer & Anor [2026] EWHC 1123 (Admin) (12 May 2026)
The High Court refused permission for judicial review of a limited tax consultation on APR and BPR reforms, finding no legal duty to consult, the claim out of time, and the matter non-justiciable.
The Divisional Court refused permission for judicial review of a limited tax consultation on APR and BPR reforms, finding no legitimate expectation, delay, and parliamentary privilege.
The Partnership’s supplies to FFL constituted a single, indivisible composite supply of animal rearing and management, taxable at the standard rate. No exempt supply of land or zero-rated supply of animal feeding stuffs arose. No legitimate expectation or estoppel by convention was established as there was no clear, unambiguous representation or shared assumption by HMRC.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 did not prevent a trial judge from reversing a mid-trial ruling of no case to answer.
The dominant purpose for making the traffic orders permanent was to safeguard revenue, which is not an authorised purpose under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984; therefore, the orders are unlawful and must be quashed.
Source excerpt
The Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v The Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) (20 March 2026)
The High Court held there is no duty to consult before introducing a Bill into the Senedd, treating that step as part of legislative proceedings and dismissing the claim.
The High Court held there was no legal duty to consult before Welsh Ministers introduced a Bill to ban greyhound racing, and dismissed the claim.
Explore more
