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

interpretation-of-judicial-review-time-limits-under-section-27a-of-the-court-of-session-act-1988:-o& Case Commentaries

R v Mercer [2025] EWCA Crim 1197: Caring Motives Do Not Mitigate Persistent Breaches of Protective Orders; Remand Credit Clarified and Uplifts for Multiple Breaches Affirmed

R v Mercer [2025] EWCA Crim 1197: Caring Motives Do Not Mitigate Persistent Breaches of Protective Orders; Remand Credit Clarified and Uplifts for Multiple Breaches Affirmed

Date: Aug 30, 2025
R v Mercer [2025] EWCA Crim 1197: Caring Motives Do Not Mitigate Persistent Breaches of Protective Orders; Remand Credit Clarified and Uplifts for Multiple Breaches Affirmed England and Wales Court...
R v ICG [2025] EWCA Crim 1196: Limited Discount for Attempted Rape Where Completion Was Thwarted by Interruption, With Lead-Count Uplift to Reflect Concurrent Penetrative Offences; Consecutive Sentences for Distinct Episodes Reaffirmed

R v ICG [2025] EWCA Crim 1196: Limited Discount for Attempted Rape Where Completion Was Thwarted by Interruption, With Lead-Count Uplift to Reflect Concurrent Penetrative Offences; Consecutive Sentences for Distinct Episodes Reaffirmed

Date: Aug 30, 2025
R v ICG [2025] EWCA Crim 1196: Limited Discount for Attempted Rape Where Completion Was Thwarted by Interruption, With Lead-Count Uplift to Reflect Concurrent Penetrative Offences; Consecutive...
R v Peters [2025] EWCA Crim 1175: Standalone violent disorder in a fatal incident—Category 1A (4‑year) starting point affirmed and no parity with “academic” concurrent sentences

R v Peters [2025] EWCA Crim 1175: Standalone violent disorder in a fatal incident—Category 1A (4‑year) starting point affirmed and no parity with “academic” concurrent sentences

Date: Aug 28, 2025
R v Peters [2025] EWCA Crim 1175: Standalone violent disorder in a fatal incident—Category 1A (4‑year) starting point affirmed and no parity with “academic” concurrent sentences Court: England and...
Judicial Review Is Not a Shortcut to Halt Pending Prosecutions: High Court Reaffirms Exceptional Nature of Prohibition and Routes Wrongful-Arrest Grievances to Plenary Actions

Judicial Review Is Not a Shortcut to Halt Pending Prosecutions: High Court Reaffirms Exceptional Nature of Prohibition and Routes Wrongful-Arrest Grievances to Plenary Actions

Date: Aug 27, 2025
Judicial Review Is Not a Shortcut to Halt Pending Prosecutions: High Court Reaffirms Exceptional Nature of Prohibition and Routes Wrongful-Arrest Grievances to Plenary Actions Decision commented on:...
No Shortcut to Trial: LSRA observations do not shift the plaintiff’s burden and a defendant’s pleaded case must be taken at its highest on strike‑out motions (Monarca v Hayes Solicitors LLP [2025] IEHC 472)

No Shortcut to Trial: LSRA observations do not shift the plaintiff’s burden and a defendant’s pleaded case must be taken at its highest on strike‑out motions (Monarca v Hayes Solicitors LLP [2025] IEHC 472)

Date: Aug 27, 2025
No Shortcut to Trial: LSRA observations do not shift the plaintiff’s burden and a defendant’s pleaded case must be taken at its highest on strike‑out motions Commentary on Monarca v Hayes Solicitors...
Finality Means Final: High Court reaffirms s.39 Courts of Justice Act 1936 applies to interlocutory and procedural orders on Circuit appeals; possession granted notwithstanding securitisation and transfer challenges

Finality Means Final: High Court reaffirms s.39 Courts of Justice Act 1936 applies to interlocutory and procedural orders on Circuit appeals; possession granted notwithstanding securitisation and transfer challenges

Date: Aug 27, 2025
“Finality Means Final” on Circuit Appeals: The High Court confirms s.39 CJA 1936 forecloses later attacks on its appellate orders and grants possession despite securitisation and transfer objections...
“Content-First Exclusion” in Electronic Communications Services: A Commentary on Sky UK Ltd v Ofcom [2025] EWCA Civ 1118

“Content-First Exclusion” in Electronic Communications Services: A Commentary on Sky UK Ltd v Ofcom [2025] EWCA Civ 1118

Date: Aug 25, 2025
“Content-First Exclusion” in Electronic Communications Services: A Structured Commentary on Sky UK Ltd v The Office of Communications ([2025] EWCA Civ 1118) 1. Introduction On 22 August 2025 the...

        S (A Child): The Court of Appeal Re-Aligns the Article 13(b) Test – Cumulative Risk,
        Vulnerable Children and the Limits of “Immediate Harm”

S (A Child): The Court of Appeal Re-Aligns the Article 13(b) Test – Cumulative Risk, Vulnerable Children and the Limits of “Immediate Harm”

Date: Aug 25, 2025
S (A Child) (Abduction: Article 13(b)) – Court of Appeal Clarifies the Correct, Holistic Test for “Grave Risk” and the Inadequacy of Abstract Protective Measures 1. Introduction In S (A Child)...
Farley v Paymaster (2025):  No-Disclosure Infringement, “Well-Founded Fear” Test, and the Rejection of a Seriousness Threshold under Article 82 GDPR

Farley v Paymaster (2025): No-Disclosure Infringement, “Well-Founded Fear” Test, and the Rejection of a Seriousness Threshold under Article 82 GDPR

Date: Aug 25, 2025
Farley & Ors v Paymaster (1836) Ltd (t/a Equiniti) [2025] EWCA Civ 1117— No Need for Third-Party Disclosure; No “Seriousness” Threshold; Compensation for “Well-Founded Fear” under GDPR 1....
Neagoe v Minister for Social Protection: Informal Intrafamily Caregiving and Board-and-Lodging Do Not Confer EU “Worker” Status; Carer’s Allowance is “Social Assistance” Requiring Article 7(1)(b) Compliance

Neagoe v Minister for Social Protection: Informal Intrafamily Caregiving and Board-and-Lodging Do Not Confer EU “Worker” Status; Carer’s Allowance is “Social Assistance” Requiring Article 7(1)(b) Compliance

Date: Aug 23, 2025
Neagoe v Minister for Social Protection: Informal Intrafamily Caregiving and Board-and-Lodging Do Not Confer EU “Worker” Status; Carer’s Allowance is “Social Assistance” Requiring Article 7(1)(b)...
“Resided Together” Means Living as Spouses: First Scottish Guidance on Paragraph 8(c) DMPA 1973 and Habitual Residence in Cross‑Border Divorce — Commentary on JMS v HMS [2025] CSOH 80

“Resided Together” Means Living as Spouses: First Scottish Guidance on Paragraph 8(c) DMPA 1973 and Habitual Residence in Cross‑Border Divorce — Commentary on JMS v HMS [2025] CSOH 80

Date: Aug 23, 2025
“Resided Together” Means Living as Spouses: First Scottish Guidance on Paragraph 8(c) DMPA 1973 and Habitual Residence in Cross‑Border Divorce Commentary on JMS against HMS (Court of Session) [2025]...
The “Flatley Test”: Determining Ordinary Residence and Sufficient Domestic Assets in Security-for-Costs Motions

The “Flatley Test”: Determining Ordinary Residence and Sufficient Domestic Assets in Security-for-Costs Motions

Date: Aug 22, 2025
The “Flatley Test”: Determining Ordinary Residence and Sufficient Domestic Assets in Security-for-Costs Motions Introduction Flatley v. Austin Newport Group Ltd & Ors ([2025] IEHC 461) is a...
Mutual Corroboration Across Long Intervals and Objective Indecency: Jury Primacy Reaffirmed in HMA v CM [2025] HCJAC 40

Mutual Corroboration Across Long Intervals and Objective Indecency: Jury Primacy Reaffirmed in HMA v CM [2025] HCJAC 40

Date: Aug 21, 2025
Mutual Corroboration Across Long Intervals and Objective Indecency: Jury Primacy Reaffirmed in HMA v CM [2025] HCJAC 40 Introduction This appeal under section 107A of the Criminal Procedure...
Dunbar Factors: Punitive Civil Contempt for Breach of Anton Piller and Mareva Orders in Digital Piracy Cases

Dunbar Factors: Punitive Civil Contempt for Breach of Anton Piller and Mareva Orders in Digital Piracy Cases

Date: Aug 21, 2025
Dunbar Factors: Punitive Civil Contempt for Breach of Anton Piller and Mareva Orders in Digital Piracy Cases Commentary on Sky UK Ltd v Dunbar (Approved) [2025] IEHC 465 (High Court, Sanfey J., 20...
“Reasonableness” as the Shield: When Local Authorities Escape Liability for Expenses in Child-Protection Interdicts

“Reasonableness” as the Shield: When Local Authorities Escape Liability for Expenses in Child-Protection Interdicts

Date: Aug 20, 2025
“Reasonableness” as the Shield: When Local Authorities Escape Liability for Expenses in Child-Protection Interdicts 1. Introduction Case: "A" Council for Interdict ([2025] CSOH 78), Opinion of Lord...
Continuing trustees retain title and interest to oppose a judicial factor’s proposals where the estate has not been sequestrated

Continuing trustees retain title and interest to oppose a judicial factor’s proposals where the estate has not been sequestrated

Date: Aug 20, 2025
Continuing trustees retain title and interest to oppose a judicial factor’s proposals where the estate has not been sequestrated Introduction This commentary analyzes the Outer House decision of the...
“Solid Practical Benefit” and “Proper Case” Reaffirmed: Irish High Court tightens Order 11 service‑out for foreign judgment enforcement absent an Irish nexus

“Solid Practical Benefit” and “Proper Case” Reaffirmed: Irish High Court tightens Order 11 service‑out for foreign judgment enforcement absent an Irish nexus

Date: Aug 19, 2025
“Solid Practical Benefit” and “Proper Case” Reaffirmed: Irish High Court tightens Order 11 service‑out for foreign judgment enforcement absent an Irish nexus Case: Petersen Energia Inversora SAU &...
“Hollow” Cross-Undertakings and Operational-Control Injunctions: A Commentary on Yodel Delivery Network Ltd v Corlett & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 1108

“Hollow” Cross-Undertakings and Operational-Control Injunctions: A Commentary on Yodel Delivery Network Ltd v Corlett & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 1108

Date: Aug 18, 2025
“Hollow” Cross-Undertakings and Operational-Control Injunctions: A Commentary on Yodel Delivery Network Ltd v Corlett & Others [2025] EWCA Civ 1108 1. Introduction The Court of Appeal’s decision in...
Sentencing Hierarchy Confirmed: Rape of a Young Child Merits Significantly Higher Penalties – Commentary on H.M. Advocate v. McMahon & Lambert [2025] HCJAC 34

Sentencing Hierarchy Confirmed: Rape of a Young Child Merits Significantly Higher Penalties – Commentary on H.M. Advocate v. McMahon & Lambert [2025] HCJAC 34

Date: Aug 18, 2025
Sentencing Hierarchy Confirmed: Rape of a Young Child Merits Significantly Higher Penalties – Commentary on H.M. Advocate v. McMahon & Lambert [2025] HCJAC 34 1. Introduction The Scottish High Court...
Pojda v Lord Advocate: Scottish High Court Re-Affirms the “Exceptionally Severe” Article 8 Threshold in Extradition Cases

Pojda v Lord Advocate: Scottish High Court Re-Affirms the “Exceptionally Severe” Article 8 Threshold in Extradition Cases

Date: Aug 18, 2025
Pojda v Lord Advocate (No 2) [2025] HCJAC 33: Scottish High Court Re-Affirms the “Exceptionally Severe” Article 8 Threshold in Extradition Cases 1. Introduction The High Court of Justiciary, sitting...
Previous   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