Visit UKSCAll cases
968 Cases
JCPC/2026/0055
•
Appeal issuedCase summary:Last updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0095
•
CONSTITUTION
Hearing listedCase summary:Do sections 13 and 16 of the Sexual Offences Act 1986 (the “Act”) repeal and re-enact sections 59, 60 and 61 of the Offence Against the Person Act 1925 and so fall within section 6 of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (the “Constitution”)? Do sections 13 and 16 of the Act infringe the fundamental rights guaranteed by section 4 of the Constitution? Are sections 13 and 16 of the Act reasonably justifiable, in whole or in part, in a society which has proper respect for the rights and freedoms of the individual?
Last updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2020/0065
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Judgment given[2022] UKPC 47Case summary:Was the removal of all of the members of a family from a Bermudan trust as objects, whilst simultaneously adding a purpose trust as an object to the same trust by its trustee, beyond the scope of the trustee’s powers, not an exercise of those powers for a proper purpose, or otherwise invalid?
Linked casesLast updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2020/0064
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Judgment given[2022] UKPC 47Case summary:Was the removal of all of the members of a family from a Bermudan trust as objects, whilst simultaneously adding a purpose trust as an object to the same trust by its trustee, beyond the scope of the trustee’s powers, not an exercise of those powers for a proper purpose, or otherwise invalid?
Linked casesLast updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0031
•
CRIME
Hearing listedCase summary:Did the Court of Appeal err in finding: (i) that there was no case to answer because no documents were properly admitted as evidence? (ii) a miscarriage of justice had occurred because the prosecution had shown documents to the jury that had not been tendered into evidence?
Linked casesLast updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0072
•
CONSTITUTION
Hearing listedCase summary:1) Was the President’s Proclamation No 8 of 2011 of a state of public emergency contrary to the Constitution and therefore unlawful? 2) Were the Regulations issued under this Proclamation justified by reference to the state of public emergency? 3) If so, were the arrests and detentions of the appellants under these Regulations nonetheless unlawful?
Linked casesLast updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2024/0086
•
CRIME
Hearing listedCase summary:Whether the first instance judge erred in his application of the law as to whether assets were recoverable as property obtained through unlawful conduct.
Last updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0040
•
LANDLORD AND TENANT
Appeal issuedCase summary:Can land owned by the Crown be acquired by prescription?
Last updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0066
•
COMMERCIAL
Hearing listedCase summary:Did the directors of a company breach their duties when they issued new shares resulting in a beneficial owner and co-shareholder ceasing to be a beneficial owner, either because (i) the issuance did not pursue a proper purpose, and/or (ii) they did not have regard to the market value of the company when determining the share price?
Last updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0047
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Appeal issuedCase summary:Is there a binding agreement for the grant of a lease?
Last updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2019/0118
•
COURT PROCEDURE
Hearing listedCase summary:Whether the Supreme Court of Mauritius was correct to find the Appellant, Mr. Stephen Anthony Aldridge, liable for having breached the Companies Act 2001 for having debited the bank account of the Respondent, Mordaunt Estates Ltd., and credited his own account for the sum of GBP 615,000.
Last updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0063
•
NEGLIGENCE
Hearing listedCase summary:These appeals concern allegations of clinical negligence following Aeden’s birth. The issues raised for the JCPC’s consideration all concern findings of fact in relation to the cause of Aeden’s cerebral palsy. In Dr Abdulla’s appeal (JCPC/2025/0063), and in Surgi-Med Clinic Co Ltd’s cross-appeal (JCPC/2025/0065/A) (1) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to reverse the High Court’s finding of fact as to the timing of Dr Abdulla’s arrival? (2) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to find that causation was inevitably proved against Dr Abdulla, if it was proved that he arrived at 4am? In Aeden Balwah’s appeal (JCPC/2025/0065) (1) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to uphold the High Court’s finding that it had not been proved that Surgi-Med Clinic Co Ltd’s breach of duty caused Aeden Balwah’s cerebral palsy?
Linked casesLast updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0065
•
NEGLIGENCE
Hearing listedCase summary:These appeals concern allegations of clinical negligence following Aeden’s birth. The issues raised for the JCPC’s consideration all concern findings of fact in relation to the cause of Aeden’s cerebral palsy. In Dr Abdulla’s appeal (JCPC/2025/0063), and in Surgi-Med Clinic Co Ltd’s cross-appeal (JCPC/2025/0065/A) (1) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to reverse the High Court’s finding of fact as to the timing of Dr Abdulla’s arrival? (2) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to find that causation was inevitably proved against Dr Abdulla, if it was proved that he arrived at 4am? In Aeden Balwah’s appeal (JCPC/2025/0065) (1) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to uphold the High Court’s finding that it had not been proved that Surgi-Med Clinic Co Ltd’s breach of duty caused Aeden Balwah’s cerebral palsy?
Linked casesLast updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0065/A
•
NEGLIGENCE
Hearing listedCase summary:These appeals concern allegations of clinical negligence following Aeden’s birth. The issues raised for the JCPC’s consideration all concern findings of fact in relation to the cause of Aeden’s cerebral palsy. In Dr Abdulla’s appeal (JCPC/2025/0063), and in Surgi-Med Clinic Co Ltd’s cross-appeal (JCPC/2025/0065/A) (1) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to reverse the High Court’s finding of fact as to the timing of Dr Abdulla’s arrival? (2) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to find that causation was inevitably proved against Dr Abdulla, if it was proved that he arrived at 4am? In Aeden Balwah’s appeal (JCPC/2025/0065) (1) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to uphold the High Court’s finding that it had not been proved that Surgi-Med Clinic Co Ltd’s breach of duty caused Aeden Balwah’s cerebral palsy?
Linked casesLast updated: 1 July 2026
JCPC/2020/0035
•
BUSINESS, PROPERTY, WILLS, AND TRUSTS
Judgment given[2022] UKPC 16Case summary:What is the proper construction of the Trinidad and Tobago Petroleum Act and Regulations? Does the Act allow contractual rights to lay a gas pipe to be granted to parties who do not have a petroleum operations licence? Can property rights be validly granted over gas pipelines?
Last updated: 1 July 2026
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.