Log In
  • US
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Supreme Court
  • High Courts
    All High Courts
    Allahabad High Court
    Andhra Pradesh High Court
    Bombay High Court
    Calcutta High Court
    Chhattisgarh High Court
    Delhi High Court
    Gauhati High Court
    Gujarat High Court
    Himachal Pradesh High Court
    Jammu and Kashmir High Court
    Jharkhand High Court
    Karnataka High Court
    Kerala High Court
    Madhya Pradesh High Court
    Madras High Court
    Manipur High Court
    Meghalaya High Court
    Orissa High Court
    Patna High Court
    Punjab & Haryana High Court
    Rajasthan High Court
    Sikkim High Court
    Telangana High Court
    Tripura High Court
    Uttarakhand High Court
Log In Sign Up India Judgments
  • US
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries

defining-& Case Commentaries


      Co-defendant Bad Character Evidence under s.101(1)(e) CJA 2003: When School CRIS Reports and Social Media Messages Supply “Substantial Probative Value” and the Required Jury Directions if Allegations Are Not Proved — R v Al‑Shumari [2025] EWCA Crim 1317

Co-defendant Bad Character Evidence under s.101(1)(e) CJA 2003: When School CRIS Reports and Social Media Messages Supply “Substantial Probative Value” and the Required Jury Directions if Allegations Are Not Proved — R v Al‑Shumari [2025] EWCA Crim 1317

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Co-defendant Bad Character Evidence under s.101(1)(e) CJA 2003: When School CRIS Reports and Social Media Messages Supply “Substantial Probative Value” and the Required Jury Directions if Allegations...
Carson v McKee [2025] NICA 53 — Courts must grapple with operative medical evidence before refusing adjournments; failure is a material error warranting limited remittal

Carson v McKee [2025] NICA 53 — Courts must grapple with operative medical evidence before refusing adjournments; failure is a material error warranting limited remittal

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Carson v McKee [2025] NICA 53 — Courts must grapple with operative medical evidence before refusing adjournments; failure is a material error warranting limited remittal Introduction In Carson v...
Undoing Unlawful Re-entry: Clarifying interim possession under section 47(2) and recall standards amid late buy‑out offers in sequestration sales

Undoing Unlawful Re-entry: Clarifying interim possession under section 47(2) and recall standards amid late buy‑out offers in sequestration sales

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Undoing Unlawful Re-entry: Clarifying interim possession under section 47(2) and recall standards amid late buy‑out offers in sequestration sales Introduction Decision: Opinion of Lord Richardson,...
QOCS Tender-Delay Exception Clarified: Objective Reasonableness Test and a Non-Variable 75% Cap on Pursuer’s Liability (Peter Gasper v Tain & Fearn Medical Practice and NHS Education for Scotland) [2025] CSOH 96

QOCS Tender-Delay Exception Clarified: Objective Reasonableness Test and a Non-Variable 75% Cap on Pursuer’s Liability (Peter Gasper v Tain & Fearn Medical Practice and NHS Education for Scotland) [2025] CSOH 96

Date: Oct 17, 2025
QOCS Tender-Delay Exception Clarified: Objective Reasonableness Test and a Non-Variable 75% Cap on Pursuer’s Liability Commentary on Peter Gasper v The Partners of Tain & Fearn Medical Practice and...
The s.34(11)/s.37 Interface Clarified: No Automatic Stay of an Issued Planning Grant Pending An Bord Pleanála Appeal

The s.34(11)/s.37 Interface Clarified: No Automatic Stay of an Issued Planning Grant Pending An Bord Pleanála Appeal

Date: Oct 17, 2025
The s.34(11)/s.37 Interface Clarified: No Automatic Stay of an Issued Planning Grant Pending An Bord Pleanála Appeal Case: Payne v Meath County Council, Ireland and The Attorney General; Breedon...
Discovery in Modular Trials: Court Files Must Be Accessed via Practice Direction HC86, Not Inter Partes, and Blanket Bankruptcy File Requests Are Impermissible

Discovery in Modular Trials: Court Files Must Be Accessed via Practice Direction HC86, Not Inter Partes, and Blanket Bankruptcy File Requests Are Impermissible

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Discovery in Modular Trials: Court Files Must Be Accessed via Practice Direction HC86, Not Inter Partes, and Blanket Bankruptcy File Requests Are Impermissible Case: Dunne & Ors v Lehane & Ors...
Public interest costs doctrine consolidated: no-order costs and vacatur across all levels where the State succeeds on a discrete issue of systemic importance — Hegarty v Commissioner of An Garda Síochána [2025] IESC 41 (Costs)

Public interest costs doctrine consolidated: no-order costs and vacatur across all levels where the State succeeds on a discrete issue of systemic importance — Hegarty v Commissioner of An Garda Síochána [2025] IESC 41 (Costs)

Date: Oct 17, 2025
Public interest costs doctrine consolidated: no-order costs and vacatur across all levels where the State succeeds on a discrete issue of systemic importance — Hegarty v Commissioner of An Garda...
The “Big Issue” Approach to Costs under the LSRA: Substantive Success Outweighs Narrow Relief — Electricity Supply Board v Good & ors [2025] IESC 40

The “Big Issue” Approach to Costs under the LSRA: Substantive Success Outweighs Narrow Relief — Electricity Supply Board v Good & ors [2025] IESC 40

Date: Oct 16, 2025
The “Big Issue” Approach to Costs under the LSRA: Substantive Success Outweighs Narrow Relief — Electricity Supply Board v Good & ors [2025] IESC 40 Introduction This commentary examines the Supreme...
Mackie v Mercedes-Benz: Misrepresentations as Continuing Acts for Prescription; broad s6(4) suspension; and Court of Session jurisdiction over Consumer Credit Act unfairness in group proceedings

Mackie v Mercedes-Benz: Misrepresentations as Continuing Acts for Prescription; broad s6(4) suspension; and Court of Session jurisdiction over Consumer Credit Act unfairness in group proceedings

Date: Oct 16, 2025
Misrepresentations as Continuing Acts, Broad s6(4) Suspension, and Court of Session Jurisdiction for Consumer Credit Act Unfairness in Group Proceedings Introduction In William Mackie (Representative...
Curtain Principle and Midcouple Requirement Reaffirmed: No “Solum Rights” Without a Pleaded Link in Title; Contractual Access May Be Vindicated Without Proving Ownership

Curtain Principle and Midcouple Requirement Reaffirmed: No “Solum Rights” Without a Pleaded Link in Title; Contractual Access May Be Vindicated Without Proving Ownership

Date: Oct 16, 2025
Curtain Principle and Midcouple Requirement Reaffirmed: No “Solum Rights” Without a Pleaded Link in Title; Contractual Access May Be Vindicated Without Proving Ownership Introduction This Outer House...
Continuing misrepresentation defers prescription and s140B Consumer Credit Act remedies are justiciable in Court of Session group proceedings: Commentary on Batchelor v Opel [2025] CSOH 93

Continuing misrepresentation defers prescription and s140B Consumer Credit Act remedies are justiciable in Court of Session group proceedings: Commentary on Batchelor v Opel [2025] CSOH 93

Date: Oct 16, 2025
Continuing misrepresentation defers prescription and s140B Consumer Credit Act remedies are justiciable in Court of Session group proceedings: Commentary on Batchelor v Opel [2025] CSOH 93...
FOISA section 12 costs are assessed by reference to how information is actually held: no public-interest override and no duty to upgrade systems

FOISA section 12 costs are assessed by reference to how information is actually held: no public-interest override and no duty to upgrade systems

Date: Oct 16, 2025
FOISA section 12 costs are assessed by reference to how information is actually held: no public-interest override and no duty to upgrade systems Introduction This commentary examines the decision of...
Unknown and Unaccepted Repudiation Is “Writ in Water”: Practical Utility as a Gatekeeper for Declarators in Disciplinary Context (Russo v The Council of the Law Society of Scotland [2025] CSOH 92)

Unknown and Unaccepted Repudiation Is “Writ in Water”: Practical Utility as a Gatekeeper for Declarators in Disciplinary Context (Russo v The Council of the Law Society of Scotland [2025] CSOH 92)

Date: Oct 16, 2025
Unknown and Unaccepted Repudiation Is “Writ in Water”: Practical Utility as a Gatekeeper for Declarators in Disciplinary Context Case: Adrian Russo v The Council of the Law Society of Scotland...
Re‑pleading on Appeal and the Primacy of Facts over Labels: Court of Appeal Endorses Case‑Management Directions Preceding a Strike‑Out Appeal

Re‑pleading on Appeal and the Primacy of Facts over Labels: Court of Appeal Endorses Case‑Management Directions Preceding a Strike‑Out Appeal

Date: Oct 16, 2025
Re‑pleading on Appeal and the Primacy of Facts over Labels: Court of Appeal Endorses Case‑Management Directions Preceding a Strike‑Out Appeal Introduction In Yamba v BW Legal Services Ltd [2025] EWCA...
Security for Costs under CPR 2025: No Transitional Carve‑Out for Pre‑Brexit Claims; Litigant‑Specific Enforcement Risks Justify Residence‑Abroad Orders; Security Confined to Costs of Resisting the Appeal

Security for Costs under CPR 2025: No Transitional Carve‑Out for Pre‑Brexit Claims; Litigant‑Specific Enforcement Risks Justify Residence‑Abroad Orders; Security Confined to Costs of Resisting the Appeal

Date: Oct 16, 2025
Security for Costs under CPR 2025: No Transitional Carve‑Out for Pre‑Brexit Claims; Litigant‑Specific Enforcement Risks Justify Residence‑Abroad Orders; Security Confined to Costs of Resisting the...
CPS‑Equivalent Cap on Private Prosecutors’ Recovery from Central Funds under s17(2A) POA 1985 where CPS was not engaged and the legal market not tested — Commentary on BDI & Ors, R v [2025] EWCA Crim 1289

CPS‑Equivalent Cap on Private Prosecutors’ Recovery from Central Funds under s17(2A) POA 1985 where CPS was not engaged and the legal market not tested — Commentary on BDI & Ors, R v [2025] EWCA Crim 1289

Date: Oct 16, 2025
CPS‑Equivalent Cap on Private Prosecutors’ Recovery from Central Funds under s17(2A) POA 1985 where CPS was not engaged and the legal market not tested Introduction This reserved costs judgment of...
Mainpay Ltd v HMRC: No “Single Discontinuous Employment” under ITEPA and a Clarified Causation Test for “Loss of Tax Brought About Carelessly”

Mainpay Ltd v HMRC: No “Single Discontinuous Employment” under ITEPA and a Clarified Causation Test for “Loss of Tax Brought About Carelessly”

Date: Oct 16, 2025
Mainpay Ltd v HMRC: No “Single Discontinuous Employment” under ITEPA and a Clarified Causation Test for “Loss of Tax Brought About Carelessly” Introduction This appeal concerned umbrella company...
Coordinating Bankruptcy and Plenary Proceedings: Appointment‑Validity Must Be Decided First and in the Correct Procedural Vehicle — No Parallel Litigation Across Lists (Dunne [2025] IEHC 531)

Coordinating Bankruptcy and Plenary Proceedings: Appointment‑Validity Must Be Decided First and in the Correct Procedural Vehicle — No Parallel Litigation Across Lists (Dunne [2025] IEHC 531)

Date: Oct 16, 2025
Coordinating Bankruptcy and Plenary Proceedings: Appointment‑Validity Must Be Decided First and in the Correct Procedural Vehicle — No Parallel Litigation Across Lists (Dunne [2025] IEHC 531)...
"No removal while your own guidance promises a 30‑day NRM reconsideration": Secretary of State must preserve reconsideration opportunity offered under statutory guidance

"No removal while your own guidance promises a 30‑day NRM reconsideration": Secretary of State must preserve reconsideration opportunity offered under statutory guidance

Date: Oct 16, 2025
"No removal while your own guidance promises a 30‑day NRM reconsideration": Secretary of State must preserve reconsideration opportunity offered under statutory guidance Case: CTK, R (On the...
Section 55 Requires Child‑Best‑Interests Review of Immigration Rules: Court of Appeal Orders Home Secretary to Reassess Child Refugee Family Reunion Policy; Differential Treatment Recognised under Article 14

Section 55 Requires Child‑Best‑Interests Review of Immigration Rules: Court of Appeal Orders Home Secretary to Reassess Child Refugee Family Reunion Policy; Differential Treatment Recognised under Article 14

Date: Oct 9, 2025
Section 55 Requires Child‑Best‑Interests Review of Immigration Rules: Court of Appeal Orders Home Secretary to Reassess Child Refugee Family Reunion Policy; Differential Treatment Recognised under...
Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • Judgment Takedown Policy (India)
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases
  • Acts

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert