All cases
971 Cases
JCPC/2025/0095
•
CONSTITUTION
Hearing in progressCase 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: 8 July 2026
JCPC/2026/0058
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 7 July 2026
JCPC/2026/0057
•
Permission to Appeal application lodgedCase summary:Last updated: 7 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0040
•
LANDLORD AND TENANT
Appeal issuedCase summary:Can land owned by the Crown be acquired by prescription?
Last updated: 7 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: 7 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0074
•
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: 7 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0073
•
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: 7 July 2026
JCPC/2024/0092
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment given[2026] UKPC 8Case summary:Did the Court of Appeal err in finding that the termination notice period given by the Respondents was reasonable?
Last updated: 6 July 2026
JCPC/2022/0011
•
CONSTITUTION
Judgment given[2026] UKPC 3Case summary:What is the correct interpretation of Section 121(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago and Regulation 168 of the Public Service Commission Regulations (“Reg. 168”) in the context of prison officer promotions?
Last updated: 6 July 2026
JCPC/2024/0062
•
COMMERCIAL
Judgment given[2026] UKPC 2Case summary:Whether compliance with conditions precedent to payment in a FIDIC contract is essential in order to enable a contractor to recover payment for variations alleged to have been made.
Last updated: 6 July 2026
JCPC/2026/0035
•
ARBITRATION
Appeal issuedCase summary:The Company has an arbitration clause requiring all differences between the Company and its members be referred to arbitration. To what extent does this clause bind shareholder-shareholder unfair prejudice claims under section 184l of the Business Companies Act?
Last updated: 6 July 2026
JCPC/2026/0036
•
EMPLOYMENT
Appeal issuedCase summary:Did the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal err in its assessment of damages? Does Article 11.2 of the Industrial Agreement confer greater rights or benefits than section 29 of the Employment Act 2001?
Last updated: 6 July 2026
JCPC/2025/0007
•
COURT PROCEDURE
Judgment given[2026] UKPC 23Case summary:Did the Court of Appeal err in striking out the Appellant’s appeal for want of prosecution and/or abuse of process?
Last updated: 6 July 2026
JCPC/2023/0067
•
PUBLIC LAW AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Judgment given[2026] UKPC 19Case summary:(i) Was the Court of Appeal wrong because it did not overturn the decision of the trial judge to strike out Mr Hosein’s constitutional claim on the basis of various factors, in particular the availability of a parallel remedy and the delay in bringing proceedings? (ii) Was the Court of Appeal wrong to conclude there was no evidence of apparent bias on the part of the trial judge?
Last updated: 6 July 2026
JCPC/2023/0103
•
CRIME
Judgment given[2026] UKPC 18Case summary:Did the Court of Appeal err in its interpretation of the Civil Asset Recovery and Management and Unexplained Wealth Act No 8 of 2019 (the “Act”) in finding that the Preliminary Unexplained Wealth Order (“PUWO”) originally imposed under that Act and then set aside by the High Court could be reinstated, including as against the Estate of Sheldon Spring?
Last updated: 6 July 2026
Sign up for case email alerts
Sign up to receive email alerts when a new case is added by the Court.