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 sentencing judge followed the relevant guidelines, properly accounted for RDP's age and individual circumstances, and imposed a sentence commensurate with the seriousness and ongoing risk posed by the offences. The custodial and extension periods were justified and not manifestly excessive.
Source excerpt
The conviction for the Bail Act offence was unlawful and must be quashed due to the Rule of Specialty. The eight-year extended sentence for sexual assault was not manifestly excessive given the applicant's dangerousness, aggravating factors, and impact on the justice system.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed publication of care judgments, anonymising only the child RR and her father, and varied the Transparency Order accordingly.
Blackpool Borough Council v RR & Ors [2026] EWHC 1100 (Fam) (14 May 2026)
The court ruled on publication and anonymisation in care proceedings, ordering publication of the judgments with only RR and her father anonymised.
Thorne & Anor v Protheroe-Beynon [2026] EWHC 1042 (KB) (06 May 2026)
The defendant's conduct, including repeated threatening communications and public allegations of professional misconduct, is more likely than not to be found to amount to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The threshold test for interim injunctive relief under s12(3) Human Rights Act 1998 is satisfied. The balance of convenience and inadequacy of damages favour continuation of the injunction. The defendant's ECHR Article 10 rights do not outweigh the claimants' rights to be free from harassment. Statements made in inter partes correspondence are immune from suit unless…
Source excerpt
EF v The London Borough of Hackney & Anor [2026] EWCOP 20 (T3) (05 May 2026)
Appeal dismissed against refusal to discharge a Court of Protection Transparency Order preserving anonymity and reporting restrictions in P’s welfare proceedings.
Appeal dismissed against refusal to discharge a Court of Protection Transparency Order. The judge held the order proportionately protected P’s privacy and placement stability.
Permission to appeal was refused as the grounds did not meet the threshold of real prospect of success or compelling reason. A reporting restriction order was granted only in respect of specific findings in the judgment that posed a substantial risk of prejudice to the administration of justice in pending criminal proceedings, but not for the entire judgment, balancing open justice against the risk of prejudice.
Source excerpt
The County Court refused the claimant’s late application for anonymity, holding that open justice prevailed and the evidence did not justify restricting publication.
Idziak v Merlin Entertainment PLC & Anor [2026] EWCC 24 (30 April 2026)
The County Court refused the claimant’s post-trial application for anonymity, holding that open justice prevailed and the evidence did not justify derogation.
Explore more
