Log In
  • India
  • US
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)
  • Commentaries
    United Kingdom
    England and Wales
    Scotland
    Northern Ireland
    Ireland
Log In Sign Up UK Judgments
  • India
  • US

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

membership-validity-and-negligence-in-connolly-v-o& Case Commentaries

Strict Invalidity of RTM Claim Notices for Participation-Notice Breaches and the Inclusion of Equitable Lessees as “Qualifying Tenants” – Commentary on Avon Freeholds Ltd v Cresta Court E RTM Company Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1016

Strict Invalidity of RTM Claim Notices for Participation-Notice Breaches and the Inclusion of Equitable Lessees as “Qualifying Tenants” – Commentary on Avon Freeholds Ltd v Cresta Court E RTM Company Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1016

Date: Aug 1, 2025
Strict Invalidity of RTM Claim Notices for Participation-Notice Breaches and the Inclusion of Equitable Lessees as “Qualifying Tenants” Commentary on Avon Freeholds Ltd v Cresta Court E RTM Company...
“From the Furnace, Not the Fence” – Supreme Court Clarifies the Measuring Point for Section 5 of the Cremation Act 1902

“From the Furnace, Not the Fence” – Supreme Court Clarifies the Measuring Point for Section 5 of the Cremation Act 1902

Date: Aug 1, 2025
“From the Furnace, Not the Fence” – Supreme Court Clarifies the Measuring Point for Section 5 of the Cremation Act 1902 Introduction Wathen-Fayed v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and...
“From Poor Cover-Up to High Culpability” – Sami & Salem [2025] EWCA Crim 1115 Re-defines Sentencing for High-Value Vehicle Theft Conspiracies

“From Poor Cover-Up to High Culpability” – Sami & Salem [2025] EWCA Crim 1115 Re-defines Sentencing for High-Value Vehicle Theft Conspiracies

Date: Aug 1, 2025
“From Poor Cover-Up to High Culpability” – Sami & Salem ([2025] EWCA Crim 1115) Re-defines Sentencing for High-Value Vehicle Theft Conspiracies Introduction In Sami & Anor, R v the Court of Appeal...
Inherent Jurisdiction as the Only Lawful Route for Deprivation of Liberty and Contact Restrictions Not Permissible Under the Assisted Decision‑Making (Capacity) Act 2015: Commentary on HSE v M.T. [2025] IEHC 440

Inherent Jurisdiction as the Only Lawful Route for Deprivation of Liberty and Contact Restrictions Not Permissible Under the Assisted Decision‑Making (Capacity) Act 2015: Commentary on HSE v M.T. [2025] IEHC 440

Date: Aug 1, 2025
Inherent Jurisdiction as the Only Lawful Route for Deprivation of Liberty and Contact Restrictions Not Permissible Under the Assisted Decision‑Making (Capacity) Act 2015: Commentary on HSE v M.T....
Murphy v. Roscommon County Council: Re-defining the Threshold for Judicial Review of a Circuit Court’s Refusal to State a Case & Clarifying the Non-Joinder Rule for Trial Judges

Murphy v. Roscommon County Council: Re-defining the Threshold for Judicial Review of a Circuit Court’s Refusal to State a Case & Clarifying the Non-Joinder Rule for Trial Judges

Date: Aug 1, 2025
Murphy v. Roscommon County Council (High Court, 2025): A Landmark on (1) the Low “Arguable Grounds” Threshold for Judicial Review of a Circuit Court’s Refusal to State a Case and (2) the Obligation...
“Demonstration & Satisfaction” and the Contextual Duty to Give Reasons – A Commentary on Sexton v. An Bord Pleanála [2025] IEHC 449

“Demonstration & Satisfaction” and the Contextual Duty to Give Reasons – A Commentary on Sexton v. An Bord Pleanála [2025] IEHC 449

Date: Aug 1, 2025
“Demonstration & Satisfaction” and the Contextual Duty to Give Reasons – A Commentary on Sexton v. An Bord Pleanála [2025] IEHC 449 1 – Introduction Sexton v. An Bord Pleanála (“Sexton”) is the High...
“The Grace Test”: Re-calibrating Youth Sentencing When Serious Sexual Offending Tips the Scales Toward Custody

“The Grace Test”: Re-calibrating Youth Sentencing When Serious Sexual Offending Tips the Scales Toward Custody

Date: Aug 1, 2025
“The Grace Test”: Re-calibrating Youth Sentencing When Serious Sexual Offending Tips the Scales Toward Custody 1. Introduction Grace, R. v ([2025] EWCA Crim 1047) is a reference by His Majesty’s...
McIntyre and the Sentencing of Online Incitement: Absence of Direct Causation Is No Mitigation under s.46 SCA 2007 in Widespread Public Disorder

McIntyre and the Sentencing of Online Incitement: Absence of Direct Causation Is No Mitigation under s.46 SCA 2007 in Widespread Public Disorder

Date: Aug 1, 2025
McIntyre and the Sentencing of Online Incitement: Absence of Direct Causation Is No Mitigation under s.46 SCA 2007 in Widespread Public Disorder Citation: R v McIntyre [2025] EWCA Crim 1191 Court:...
“Reserving Costs” as the Default After an Unsuccessful Summary-Judgment Motion: A Commentary on Xerotech Ltd v Ayro Inc ([2025] IEHC 439)

“Reserving Costs” as the Default After an Unsuccessful Summary-Judgment Motion: A Commentary on Xerotech Ltd v Ayro Inc ([2025] IEHC 439)

Date: Aug 1, 2025
“Reserving Costs” as the Default After an Unsuccessful Summary-Judgment Motion Commentary on Xerotech Ltd v Ayro Inc ([2025] IEHC 439) 1. Introduction In Xerotech Ltd v Ayro Inc, Ms Justice Emily...
Drawdown Trumps Unfulfilled Valuation Preconditions in Commercial Lending: Borrowers Have No Right to Bank Valuations Absent Assumption of Responsibility (Allied Irish Banks plc & Everyday Finance DAC v Doran [2025] IEHC 515)

Drawdown Trumps Unfulfilled Valuation Preconditions in Commercial Lending: Borrowers Have No Right to Bank Valuations Absent Assumption of Responsibility (Allied Irish Banks plc & Everyday Finance DAC v Doran [2025] IEHC 515)

Date: Aug 1, 2025
Drawdown Trumps Unfulfilled Valuation Preconditions in Commercial Lending: Borrowers Have No Right to Bank Valuations Absent Assumption of Responsibility Case: Allied Irish Banks PLC & Everyday...
Rossiter: Guarding Against Double-Counting and Preserving Full Plea Credit in Extended Sentences

Rossiter: Guarding Against Double-Counting and Preserving Full Plea Credit in Extended Sentences

Date: Jul 31, 2025
Rossiter: Guarding Against Double-Counting and Preserving Full Plea Credit in Extended Sentences 1. Introduction Case: R v Rossiter [2025] EWCA Crim 1120 (CA). The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)...
“Beyond Irish Borders: High Court Clarifies that Leave under Order 15 Rule 39 is Not Required for Derivative Actions Concerning Foreign-Registered Companies”

“Beyond Irish Borders: High Court Clarifies that Leave under Order 15 Rule 39 is Not Required for Derivative Actions Concerning Foreign-Registered Companies”

Date: Jul 31, 2025
Beyond Irish Borders: High Court Clarifies that Leave under Order 15 Rule 39 is Not Required for Derivative Actions Concerning Foreign-Registered Companies 1. Introduction Case: O'Donoghue & Manning...
Beyond Chronological Age: Brzozowski and the Nuanced Assessment of “Significant Age Disparity” in Sentencing for Sexual Activity with a Child

Beyond Chronological Age: Brzozowski and the Nuanced Assessment of “Significant Age Disparity” in Sentencing for Sexual Activity with a Child

Date: Jul 31, 2025
Beyond Chronological Age: Brzozowski and the Nuanced Assessment of “Significant Age Disparity” in Sentencing for Sexual Activity with a Child 1. Introduction In Brzozowski, R. v ([2025] EWCA Crim...
The “Initials-Distinction” Principle: Injunctions Framing Brand-Name Restraints Do Not Per Se Catch related Acronyms – Comment on Choice Broadcasting Ltd v Bauer Audio Ireland Ltd [2025] IEHC 462

The “Initials-Distinction” Principle: Injunctions Framing Brand-Name Restraints Do Not Per Se Catch related Acronyms – Comment on Choice Broadcasting Ltd v Bauer Audio Ireland Ltd [2025] IEHC 462

Date: Jul 31, 2025
The “Initials-Distinction” Principle: Injunctions Framing Brand-Name Restraints Do Not Per Se Catch Related Acronyms Comment on Choice Broadcasting Ltd v Bauer Audio Ireland Ltd [2025] IEHC 462 1....
Glass v HM Advocate (2025):  Implied Admissions, Jury Common-Sense, and the Limits of Mandatory Directions

Glass v HM Advocate (2025): Implied Admissions, Jury Common-Sense, and the Limits of Mandatory Directions

Date: Jul 30, 2025
Glass v HM Advocate (2025): Implied Admissions, Jury Common-Sense, and the Limits of Mandatory Directions Introduction The Scottish High Court of Justiciary, sitting as a three-judge Appeal Court,...
Parent-Company Support as a Defence to Diligence on the Dependence: Commentary on Mermaid Subsea Services (UK) Ltd v James Fisher Offshore Ltd [2025] CSOH 68

Parent-Company Support as a Defence to Diligence on the Dependence: Commentary on Mermaid Subsea Services (UK) Ltd v James Fisher Offshore Ltd [2025] CSOH 68

Date: Jul 30, 2025
Parent-Company Support as a Defence to Diligence on the Dependence In-Depth Commentary on Mermaid Subsea Services (UK) Ltd v James Fisher Offshore Ltd [2025] CSOH 68, Court of Session (Outer House)...
The “Reasonable-Offer” Doctrine Reaffirmed: Sherlock Mongans v Clare County Council and the Consequences of Refusing Emergency Accommodation

The “Reasonable-Offer” Doctrine Reaffirmed: Sherlock Mongans v Clare County Council and the Consequences of Refusing Emergency Accommodation

Date: Jul 30, 2025
The “Reasonable-Offer” Doctrine Reaffirmed: Sherlock Mongans v Clare County Council and the Consequences of Refusing Emergency Accommodation 1. Introduction Sherlock Mongans & Anor v Clare County...
Beyond Parental Dominion: Court of Appeal Re-Affirms Welfare Paramountcy
            and Restricts the Reach of Gillick Competence – Commentary on 
            S, Re (Wardship: Removal to Ghana) [2025] EWCA Civ 1011

Beyond Parental Dominion: Court of Appeal Re-Affirms Welfare Paramountcy and Restricts the Reach of Gillick Competence – Commentary on S, Re (Wardship: Removal to Ghana) [2025] EWCA Civ 1011

Date: Jul 30, 2025
Beyond Parental Dominion: Court of Appeal Re-Affirms Welfare Paramountcy and Restricts the Reach of Gillick Competence – Commentary on S, Re (Wardship: Removal to Ghana) [2025] EWCA Civ 1011 1....
Clarifying the Limits of Regulation 7: Capacity Expansions in Existing IPAS Centres and Judicial Review – Commentary on Sexton & Ors v Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth & Ors [2025] IEHC 431

Clarifying the Limits of Regulation 7: Capacity Expansions in Existing IPAS Centres and Judicial Review – Commentary on Sexton & Ors v Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth & Ors [2025] IEHC 431

Date: Jul 30, 2025
Clarifying the Limits of Regulation 7: Capacity Expansions in Existing IPAS Centres and Judicial Review – Commentary on Sexton & Ors v Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and...
Rochford v. Kelly: Financial Hardship Alone Cannot Displace the Default Costs Rule in Private Tort Actions Against the State

Rochford v. Kelly: Financial Hardship Alone Cannot Displace the Default Costs Rule in Private Tort Actions Against the State

Date: Jul 30, 2025
Rochford v. Kelly: Financial Hardship Alone Cannot Displace the Default Costs Rule in Private Tort Actions Against the State Introduction In the supplemental costs judgment of Rochford v. Kelly & Ors...
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo

Company

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

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert

We use cookies to improve your experience

You can accept all cookies or turn off analytical ones.