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 dismissed Mr Grantham’s appeal, holding that any failure to consider medical evidence about autism was not material to the strike out and reconsideration decisions.
After discontinuance of a defamation claim, the High Court ordered the claimant to pay the defendants’ costs and made further evidence directions.
Lodhia v Twelve Trees Management Company (Bromley-By-Bow) Ltd & Ors [2026] EWHC 1177 (KB) (18 May 2026)
After Lodhia discontinued his defamation claim, the High Court held he must pay the defendants’ costs, including costs of prior applications and amendments.
The judge's decision to stay proceedings was unreasonable and premature, as there was insufficient medical evidence to conclude that a fair trial was impossible; adaptations and further medical reports should be considered before a stay is granted.
Source excerpt
The Employment Tribunal erred in law and reasoning regarding disadvantage, justification, reasonable adjustments, unfair dismissal, and failed to address wrongful dismissal; the appeal is upheld and the case remitted to a differently constituted tribunal.
Source excerpt
Employment Appeal Tribunal decision on disability discrimination, reasonable adjustments, and Sentinel rail testing. The appeal succeeded in part, with remittal against Network Rail.
McKenzie v First Greater Western Ltd (t/a Great Western Railway) [2026] EWHC 868 (KB) (17 April 2026)
The High Court refused an interim injunction to stop an employer’s disciplinary hearing, holding the employee’s complaints should be pursued within the disciplinary process and appeal.
The High Court refused to restrain a workplace disciplinary hearing, holding the claimant’s disclosure, bias, investigation, and fitness complaints should be dealt with internally and on appeal.
The Court’s permission or approval is not required for the discontinuance of these claims under CPR 38 or CPR 21.10 because the notice was unilateral and not pursuant to a settlement or compromise. The Notice of Discontinuance brought the proceedings to an end as of 5 January 2026, save for costs. The claims were in any event totally without merit due to the availability of an alternative statutory remedy. The Claimant’s Litigation Friend is liable for the Defendant’s costs, to be assessed if not agreed, but not to be enforced without leave of the Court.
Source excerpt
The claimant did not establish that refusal of the requested adjustment prevented him from making any further or different submission on a material matter; Castano is binding and claimant was not 'designated' for health and safety purposes under section 44 ERA; Tribunal's error on detriment was academic as claimant was not protected by section 44(1) ERA.
Source excerpt
Explore more
