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
Grimes (t/a The Cleveland Arms) & Ors v Liberty Mutual Insurance Europe SE [2026] EWHC 1195 (Comm) (20 May 2026)
Commercial Court preliminary issues in COVID-19 business interruption claims concerning policy construction, causation, notification, and estoppel.
The High Court refused permission for a late judicial review of Elmbridge’s planning permission, rejecting an extension of time and finding notification was adequate.
Notification of liability for HICBC under section 7 TMA must be in writing; oral notification to the Child Benefit Office does not satisfy the statutory requirement. The appellant failed to notify liability, and assessments and penalties were validly made and in time. No reasonable excuse or special circumstances were established.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal reduced an indefinite Sexual Harm Prevention Order to 10 years after finding no justification for an open-ended duration.
The sentencing judge erred by setting the sexual harm prevention order's duration to match the notification period without an independent assessment of necessity and proportionality; the appropriate duration, considering the appellant's risk and circumstances, is 5 years.
Source excerpt
Miah, R. v (Rev1) [2026] EWCA Crim 129 (29 January 2026)
The Court of Appeal reduced a sexual harm prevention order from 10 years to 5 years, holding the sentencing judge erred by treating it as matching notification requirements.
The sentence imposed, though at the lower end of the appropriate range, was not unduly lenient as it was within the discretion of the sentencing judge and reflected the seriousness of the offences after proper application of the guidelines and credit for early guilty pleas.
Source excerpt
The appellant is not suitable to be registered as a childminder due to repeated safeguarding failures, lack of candour and honesty with the regulator, and an inadequate response to a serious safeguarding allegation. The decision to cancel registration was lawful, necessary, and proportionate to protect children and public confidence. The appellant's conduct demonstrated a lack of understanding of safeguarding and an unwillingness to accept responsibility, justifying cancellation under the statutory framework.
Source excerpt
Lawrie, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1732 (10 December 2025)
The Court of Appeal refused to increase Richard Lawrie’s sentence on an Attorney General reference, holding that the two-year term was low but not unduly lenient.
The Court-Martial correctly applied the sentencing guidelines, took into account all relevant aggravating and mitigating factors, and imposed a sentence that was primarily rehabilitative rather than punitive; the combination of dismissal and a two-year Service Community Order was not manifestly excessive or unjust.
Source excerpt
Explore more
