Visit JCPCAll cases
1248 Cases
UKSC/2019/0042
•
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Judgment givenCase summary:1. Does the English court have the power or jurisdiction, or is it a proper exercise of any such power or jurisdiction without the parties’ agreement:to grant an injunction restraining infringement of a UK SEP unless the defendant enters into a global licence under a multinational patent portfolio; to determine the rates/terms for such a licence; and to declare that such rates/terms are FRAND? 2. If the answer to (i) is "yes", is England the proper forum for such a claim in the circumstances of the Conversant proceedings?3. What is the meaning and effect of the non-discrimination component of the FRAND undertaking and does it mean that materially the same licence terms as offered to Samsung must be offered to Huawei in the circumstances of the Unwired case?4. Does the CJEU’s decision in Huawei v ZTE mean that a SEP owner is entitled to seek an injunction restraining infringement of those SEPs in circumstances such as those of the Unwired case??
Linked casesLast updated: 1 April 2025
UKSC/2019/0041
•
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Judgment givenCase summary:1. Does the English court have the power or jurisdiction, or is it a proper exercise of any such power or jurisdiction without the parties’ agreement:to grant an injunction restraining infringement of a UK SEP unless the defendant enters into a global licence under a multinational patent portfolio; to determine the rates/terms for such a licence; and to declare that such rates/terms are FRAND? 2. If the answer to (i) is "yes", is England the proper forum for such a claim in the circumstances of the Conversant proceedings?3. What is the meaning and effect of the non-discrimination component of the FRAND undertaking and does it mean that materially the same licence terms as offered to Samsung must be offered to Huawei in the circumstances of the Unwired case?4. Does the CJEU’s decision in Huawei v ZTE mean that a SEP owner is entitled to seek an injunction restraining infringement of those SEPs in circumstances such as those of the Unwired case?
Linked casesLast updated: 1 April 2025
UKSC/2018/0214
•
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Judgment givenCase summary:1. Does the English court have the power or jurisdiction, or is it a proper exercise of any such power or jurisdiction without the parties’ agreement:to grant an injunction restraining infringement of a UK SEP unless the defendant enters into a global licence under a multinational patent portfolio; to determine the rates/terms for such a licence; and to declare that such rates/terms are FRAND? 2. If the answer to (i) is "yes", is England the proper forum for such a claim in the circumstances of the Conversant proceedings?3. What is the meaning and effect of the non-discrimination component of the FRAND undertaking and does it mean that materially the same licence terms as offered to Samsung must be offered to Huawei in the circumstances of the Unwired case?4. Does the CJEU’s decision in Huawei v ZTE mean that a SEP owner is entitled to seek an injunction restraining infringement of those SEPs in circumstances such as those of the Unwired case?
Linked casesLast updated: 1 April 2025
UKSC/2019/0193
•
CONSTITUTIONS
Judgment givenCase summary:1) Whether the challenge to the decision of the Prime Minister to advise Her Majesty the Queen to prorogue Parliament is justiciable in the courts. 2) Whether the appeal is in any event academic, given Parliamentary sittings before the UK’s exit from the EU on 31 October 2019? 3) If the appeal is justiciable, whether the Prime Minister’s advice was lawful.
Linked casesLegal Issue
Last updated: 31 March 2025
UKSC/2019/0192
•
CONSTITUTIONS
Judgment givenCase summary:1) Whether the decision of the Prime Minister to advise Her Majesty the Queen to prorogue Parliament is justiciable in the courts; and 2) If the decision is justiciable and the appeal is not academic, whether that advice was lawful.
Linked casesLast updated: 31 March 2025
UKSC/2025/0054
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 31 March 2025
UKSC/2023/0068
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:Whether temporary (interim) accommodation provided by local authorities pursuant to the duty at section 29 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 (the “1987 Act”) must meet the specific needs of individual members of the household in order to be suitable for the purposes of section 29(3) of the 1987 Act and article 4(b) of the Homeless Persons (Unsuitable Accommodation) (Scotland) Order 2014 (the “2014 Order”).
Last updated: 28 March 2025
UKSC/2019/0031
•
Permission to Appeal refusedCase summary:Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear the applicant’s proposed appeal given that the court from which he seeks to appeal declined to certify that a point of law of general public importance was involved in the decision. 1. Does the Supreme Court have power to grant a certificate that a point of law of general public importance was involved in the decision of the court below by virtue of section 41(4) of the Judicature (Northern Ireland) Act 1978? 2. Is the Supreme Court, notwithstanding the absence of certification by the court below that a point of law of general public importance was involved in the decision, entitled to determine its own jurisdiction in order to ensure the availability of an effective remedy where the applicant contends that his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights have been infringed?
Last updated: 28 March 2025
UKSC/2024/0087
•
CRIME
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:(1) Is a LIBOR or EURIBOR submission automatically dishonest if it is influenced by a trading advantage? (2) Must a LIBOR or EURIBOR submission be of the single cheapest rate at which the panel or prime bank could borrow at the time of the submissions or can it be a rate selected from within a range of potential borrowing rates?
Linked casesLegal issue
Last updated: 28 March 2025
UKSC/2024/0088
•
CRIME
Awaiting JudgmentCase summary:(1) Is a LIBOR or EURIBOR submission automatically dishonest if it is influenced by a trading advantage? (2) Must a LIBOR or EURIBOR submission be of the single cheapest rate at which the panel or prime bank could borrow at the time of the submissions or can it be a rate selected from within a range of potential borrowing rates?
Linked casesLegal issue
Last updated: 28 March 2025
UKSC/2025/0053
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 27 March 2025
UKSC/2025/0016
•
LANDLORD AND TENANT
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Was Ms Cabo Ms Dezotti’s landlord for the purposes of the Housing and Planning Act 2016?
Last updated: 27 March 2025
UKSC/2025/0052
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 27 March 2025
UKSC/2023/0154
•
COURT PROCEDURE
Judgment scheduledCase summary:Is the jurisdiction of the Crown Court to retry a defendant under sections 7 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1988 contingent upon the fulfilment of the procedural requirements contained in section 8 of the same act, such that a defendant who has not been arraigned within two months of the date of the order committing him for retrial cannot be lawfully retrial (save with leave of the Court of Appeal)?
Last updated: 27 March 2025
UKSC/2023/0062
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment givenCase summary:Whether the current test for an account of profits (where a fiduciary has to pay back money earned due to a breach of a duty) should be changed to introduce a requirement that the fiduciary could not have made the same profit in a way that avoided a breach of duty, i.e. to introduce a test that asks: ‘Could the same profit have been made but for the breach of fiduciary duty’?
Last updated: 26 March 2025
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.