UK Law Weekly-logo

UK Law Weekly

News & Politics Podcasts >

Weekly episodes planned with possible bonus episodes

Weekly episodes planned with possible bonus episodes
More Information


United Kingdom


Weekly episodes planned with possible bonus episodes




Singularis Holdings Ltd v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd [2019] UKSC 50

Fraudulent transactions made by a Saudi businessman left his creditors out of pocket but in this case it is the company that he was funneling the funds through that sued the bank for carrying out his instructions. At the heart of proceedings is the Quincecare duty that states a bank should not follow the dishonest instructions of its customers and in this episode we discuss its place as part of the modern legal system. Music from


In the Matter of NY (A Child) [2019] UKSC 49

When the married couple in this case decided to split up there was a question about whether their young daughter should return with her father to Israel or remain in London with her mother. As the case progressed the central issue became the use of something called the 'inherent jurisdiction of the court' that allows a judge to make a decision on almost any matter at all. Should this be allowed here and how should the inherent jurisdiction be properly used? These are the questions that the...


Travelers Insurance Co Ltd v XYZ [2019] UKSC 48

In the early 2000s a scandal erupted when it was found that a leading manufacturer of silicone breast implants had not followed regulations and therefore put a significant number of women at risk. As these sub-standard implants leaked and ruptured the number of compensation claims began to flood in. This case looks at the situation where the medical clinic became insolvent and so the claimants went after the insurance company instead. Would they get the damages that they deserved or end up...


Sequent Nominees Ltd v Hautford Ltd [2019] UKSC 47

In this case an application for planning permission was blocked by a landlord. While this was in line with the lease agreement questions were raised over whether the refusal of consent was reasonable or not. In this episode we try to understand under what circumstances it is reasonable to withhold consent and the factors that the court should take into account when coming to that decision. Music from


The Manchester Ship Canal Co Ltd v Vauxhall Motors Ltd [2019] UKSC 46

An administrative error creates an opportunity for a company to end an agreement that costs them thousands of pounds every year. When they do this the case ends up going to the Supreme Court who have to make a decision about just how costly that error will ultimately be. Music from


Shanks v Unilever Plc [2019] UKSC 45

The invention of the electrochemical capillary fill device (ECFD) represented an important development for blood glucose sensors but the inventor, Professor Ian Shanks, never saw a penny himself. In this case we follow his bid to be compensated properly for his work and critique the factors that are taken into account when the courts arrive at a decision in cases like this. Music from


Gilham v Ministry of Justice [2019] UKSC 44

The budget cuts to the administration of justice have had a profound impact since their implementation. Access to justice has been hampered for some of the most vulnerable in society but they are not the only ones affected. In this case we look at a judge who made complaints about the extra stress and pressure that she was under but the question was whether she could be classified as a worker under UK law. Music from


Routier v Commissioners for HMRC [2019] UKSC 43

The relationship between the Channel Islands and the UK is fairly settled but in this case a new element is added into the equation: the European Union. The background to the dispute is relief from inheritance tax but in these proceedings the Supreme Court also addresses wider questions of jurisdiction and the operation of law. Music from


R (on the application of Miller) v The Prime Minister [2019] UKSC 41

In one of the most important, constitutional judgments of modern times, the Supreme Court was charged with deciding whether the prorogation of Parliament announced on 28th August 2019 was lawful or not. With a Brexit deadline of 31st October looming the judgment was also of huge practical importance as it affected the ability of MPs to fully scrutinise the actions of the government. In this episode we review the decision and reflect on it in the light of the 2019 general election. Music from...


In the matter of D (A Child) [2019] UKSC 42

Whether someone consents to the deprivation of their liberty is often an irrelevant question. Sometimes people are locked up because they are a danger to society whereas others are simply limited because it is in their best interests. Nevertheless that point of consent in a medical context is important and so in this case we explore whether the parents of a young man who is not quite yet an adult can still use parental responsibility to consent on his behalf. Music from


Akçil v Koza Ltd [2019] UKSC 40

What happens when the will of a totalitarian regime comes up against the English legal system? How can that system maintain its integrity in the face of such manifest injustice? In this case that concerns a jurisdictional dispute we get answers to those questions and they might just surprise you. Music from


Commissioners for HMRC v Frank A Smart & Son Ltd [2019] UKSC 39

In this case about farming subsidies and the payment of VAT we consider the issue from a moral standpoint and ask what role the law can play to establish a more just system. Music from


Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring [2019] UKSC 38

Access to information about a legal case in open court is vitally important to any functioning democracy but is also necessarily subject to certain restrictions. In this case the Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum UK are seeking information about proceedings involving a former asbestos manufacturer. Both parties have a different interpretation of the Civil Procedure Rules and it is up to the Supreme Court to make a final decisions Music from


X v Kuoni Travel Ltd [2019] UKSC 37

When X went on holiday to Sri Lanka she was raped and assaulted by a hotel employee. In this claim against the tour operator she is seeking compensation but, as we discuss in this episode, it will require a stretched interpretation of EU law. There is also a close examination of the likely fallout if the Court of Appeal judgment is allowed to stand. Music from


R (Association of Independent Meat Suppliers) v FSA [2019] UKSC 36

When the Cleveland Meat Company bought a bull at auction they were dismayed when it was found post-mortem that the meat was not fit for human consumption. They sought to challenge the decision of the Official Veterinarian on this matter but the means of doing so was far from clear. In this episode we look at the issues, consider the impact of EU law on this area and examine the preliminary reference questions that the Supreme Court has submitted to the Court of Justice of the European Union....


Secretary of State for the Home Department v Franco Vomero [2019] UKSC 35

Franco Vomero has lived in the UK since 1985. In 2001 he killed a man and was convicted of manslaughter. Upon his release from prison the Home Secretary decided to send him back to his home country of Italy. In this case the Supreme Court looked at what it means to have a right of permanent residence and in our discussion we attempt to take stock of what it means to use deportation as a form of punishment. Music from


Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v MM [2019] UKSC 34

MM was denied the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) benefit because he did not fit into the right category when it came to the support he needed for face to face social engagement. The dispute reached the Supreme Court and it was up to the Justices to provide an interpretation of what "social support" actually means in this context. In this episode we discuss that decision and how the courts can struggle to ensure that legislation remains applicable to everyone beyond the facts of one...


London Borough of Lambeth v SoS for Housing, Communities and Local Government [2019] UKSC 33

At the heart of this case is a fairly simple question: when the conditions for use of a building are varied in a new planning permission, what previous conditions remain in place? For many years the Homebase store in Streatham Vale was prohibited from selling food but the position after a 2014 permission was no longer clear and the case eventually ended up before the Supreme Court. In this episode we discuss the judgment in this case and suggest legislative changes that would help to reduce...


Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd [2019] UKSC 32

Restraint of trade clauses are an essential feature of employment contracts because they protect the interests of employers whilst also ensuring employees have the right to go ahead and find another job. However striking a balance between these two objectives is something that the courts have struggled with over the years and this case is no different. What does it mean if an employee is prohibited from having an "interest" in a rival company and what approach should the courts take when...


Secretary of State for Work & Pensions v Gubeladze [2019] UKSC 31

Tamara Gubeladze was hoping for a quiet retirement in the UK having spent most of her life in Latvia. She thought that she had met all the conditions necessary to be entitled to a state pension but the Secretary of State denied her request for failing to comply with the Worker Registration Scheme that was established in the UK after Latvia joined the European Union. As the Supreme Court decides her fate we take the opportunity in this episode to also consider how principles of EU law have...