Results: 1448

• Zimir

  08 May 2025 (Case C-662/23); EU:C:2025:326, ECJ

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Asylum policy
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Asylum policy — Directive 2013/32/EU — Article 41 and point b of the third subparagraph of Article 313 — Procedures for granting international protection — Extension by the determining authority of the six-month examination period — Large number of applications for international protection lodged simultaneously — Concept — Consideration of other circumstances

• George Greenwood v Information Commissioner & Anor

  21 Jul 2025 [2025] UKFTT 872 (GRC), FTT

  1. This is an appeal against the Commissioner’s decision notice IC-271744-Y4X4 dated 11 June 2024 which held that the Home Office was entitled to rely on section 36(2)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (‘FOIA’) to withhold the requested information. 2. This decision contains a closed annex. The closed annex identifies the specific text that the tribunal has determined can or cannot be withheld under section 23. It contains very brief closed reasoning on section 23. A copy of the closed annex has been sent to the Commissioner and the Home Office. It has been withheld from

• HCRG Care Limited v Persons Unknown

  02 Apr 2025 [2025] EWHC 794 (KB), KBD

  1. The Claimant is a national health and care organisation with approximately 4500 employees. It is commissioned by the NHS and local authorities in England and provides a broad range of healthcare and support services. The Defendant(s) are persons unknown that go by the name of “Medusa”. 2. On or about 26 January to 12 February 2025 the Defendant took data from the Claimant’s IT systems that was confidential to the Claimant and/or its employees, clients or associated third parties (“the Stolen data”). The Claimant was informed by the Defendant on 12 February 2025 that it had been the victim
  Expand

• The Republic of Mozambique v Privinvest Shipbuilding SAL (Holding) & Ors

  16 Jun 2025 [2025] EWHC 1481 (Comm), KBD

  1. Mr Iskandar Safa (“Mr Safa”) was a Defendant in these proceedings brought by the Claimant (“Mozambique”). 2. Already ill, he gave evidence at trial. Very sadly, he died on 29 January 2024. This was shortly after the trial, which lasted 3 months, had concluded. His death was before judgment which was handed down on 29 July 2024 (Judgment No 12: “the Judgment”, at [2024] EWHC 1957 (Comm)). 3. At paragraphs [33]-[34] of the Judgment I said: “33. Sadly, shortly after the trial Mr Safa died. As the point for handing down this Judgment approached, contested applications were issued by

• Chidswell Action Group, R (on the application of) v Kirklees Council

  04 Sep 2025 [2025] EWHC 2256 (Admin), KBD

  1. This judicial review, brought by the claimant action group against the defendant local planning authority, proceeds by leave of Ms Karen Ridge, sitting as a deputy High Court judge. Ms Ridge is a former planning inspector with extensive experience in this field. I gratefully summarise the nature of the claim from her order of 11 February 2025, granting limited permission: “1. The challenge relates to a grant of outline planning permission (OPP) on 23 October 2024 for residential development of up to 181 dwellings on a 7-hectare site at Heybeck Lane, Dewsbury. The site forms part of a larger

• Lita

  03 Jul 2025 (Case C-646/23); EU:C:2025:519, ECJ

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rule of law
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  EUROPEAN UNION — Reference for a preliminary ruling — Rule of law — Independence of the judiciary — Second subparagraph of Article 191 TEU — Effective judicial protection in areas covered by EU law — Principle of irremovability of judges — Military judge found unfit for professional military service — National legislation requiring the early retirement of that judge

• Stephen Niland v R

  25 Jul 2025 [2025] EWCA Crim 945, CA

  1. On 1 June 2006 in the Crown Court sitting at Sheffield Mr Stephen Niland (“the Applicant”) pleaded guilty to one count of causing grievous bodily harm to his three-month daughter, Molly, on 10 October 2005, contrary to s. 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (“the s. 20 offence”) (“the 2006 conviction”). He was later sentenced to (and served) 2 years 3 months’ imprisonment. 2. On 27 February 2020 Molly died as a result of a chest infection linked to the brain injury and associated disabilities that she had sustained in 2005. The Applicant was charged with

• TEST CASE Tonstate Group Ltd & Ors v Rosling King LLP (Tonstate Group Limited & Ors v Rosling King LLP)

  31 Jul 2024 [2024] EWHC 2005 (Ch), Ch D

  06 Jan 2025 [2024] UKUT 184 (TCC), Fake Court

  1. Ulster Metal Refiners Limited (“the Appellant” or “UM”) is a company based in Northern Ireland of which Mr Henry Donaldson is the director. The Appellant appealed to the FTT against a decision made by HM Revenue & Customs (“HMRC”) to deny credit for input tax on the basis that it knew or should have known that the transactions in question were connected with fraud. On 12 August 2021, the FTT issued its decision (“the FTT Decision”) allowing the Appellant’s appeal in relation to around 90% of the VAT denied. 2. The Appellant’s appeal had been allocated as “complex” under
  Expand

  1 Case considered

  1 Statute considered

• Yuk Ming Cheung v Office of Intercollegiate Services & Ors

  09 May 2025 [2025] EWHC 1109 (KB), KBD

  1. This judgment follows a hearing on 11 March 2025, when I heard the following four applications (set out in chronological order): a. The first, second and fourth defendants’ application for strike out/summary judgment, dated 25 September 2024; b. The claimant’s application, dated 25 October 2024, to vary my order made on 3 October 2024; c. The third and fifth defendants’ application for strike out/summary judgment, dated 28 October 2024; and d. The claimant’s application to adjourn the hearing on 11 March 2025, dated 10 March 2025, listed as a preliminary issue at the hearing. 2. The claimant did not

• R v Thomasz Mysiak

  11 Jul 2025 [2025] EWCA Crim 1001, CA

  1. This is an application for leave to appeal against sentence and an extension of time of 682 days in which to do so. The applications have been referred to the full court by the single judge. 2. Following a trial in the Crown Court at Kingston-upon-Thames, the applicant was convicted of one offence of conspiracy to sell or transfer a prohibited weapon (count 1) and one offence of conspiracy to sell or transfer prohibited ammunition (count 2). The trial began on 4 June 2018. On 12 June, the applicant, who was on bail, failed to attend court and a