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

revocation-of-wills:-interpretation-and-evidentiary-standards-in-kench-andrews- Case Commentaries

Unpleaded Climate Points Cannot Be Certified; EIA Does Not Require State‑Wide Cumulative Traffic GHG Assessment — Commentary on Friends of Killymooney Lough v An Coimisiún Pleanála (No. 2) [2025] IEHC 576

Unpleaded Climate Points Cannot Be Certified; EIA Does Not Require State‑Wide Cumulative Traffic GHG Assessment — Commentary on Friends of Killymooney Lough v An Coimisiún Pleanála (No. 2) [2025] IEHC 576

Date: Nov 4, 2025
Unpleaded Climate Points Cannot Be Certified; EIA Does Not Require State‑Wide Cumulative Traffic GHG Assessment — Commentary on Friends of Killymooney Lough v An Coimisiún Pleanála (No. 2) [2025]...
Contractual Estoppel from Settlement Recitals Bars Post‑Settlement Challenges to Mortgagee’s Power of Sale: Donlon & Anor v Promontoria (Aran) Ltd [2025] IEHC 568

Contractual Estoppel from Settlement Recitals Bars Post‑Settlement Challenges to Mortgagee’s Power of Sale: Donlon & Anor v Promontoria (Aran) Ltd [2025] IEHC 568

Date: Nov 4, 2025
Contractual Estoppel from Settlement Recitals Bars Post‑Settlement Challenges to Mortgagee’s Power of Sale Commentary on Donlon & Anor v Promontoria (Aran) Ltd & Ors [2025] IEHC 568 (High Court,...
O’Pray v R: Maturity Discounts for Young Adults and s.322 Uplifts to Murder Minimum Terms Clarified

O’Pray v R: Maturity Discounts for Young Adults and s.322 Uplifts to Murder Minimum Terms Clarified

Date: Nov 4, 2025
O’Pray v R: Maturity Discounts for Young Adults and s.322 Uplifts to Murder Minimum Terms Clarified Introduction This commentary examines the decision of the England and Wales Court of Appeal...
No Bad Faith in Pressing for Preferred FRAND Forum Absent Legitimate Objection: ‘First Seised’ Not Determinative and Interim Licences Should Be Jurisdiction‑Neutral

No Bad Faith in Pressing for Preferred FRAND Forum Absent Legitimate Objection: ‘First Seised’ Not Determinative and Interim Licences Should Be Jurisdiction‑Neutral

Date: Nov 4, 2025
No Bad Faith in Pressing for Preferred FRAND Forum Absent Legitimate Objection: ‘First Seised’ Not Determinative and Interim Licences Should Be Jurisdiction‑Neutral Case: Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd...
“Necessary in the Interests of Justice”: Supreme Court sets the framework for non‑party access to court audio records, notice to victims, and limits on dissemination — Smith v DPP (Supreme Court, 30 Oct 2025)

“Necessary in the Interests of Justice”: Supreme Court sets the framework for non‑party access to court audio records, notice to victims, and limits on dissemination — Smith v DPP (Supreme Court, 30 Oct 2025)

Date: Nov 4, 2025
“Necessary in the Interests of Justice”: Supreme Court sets the framework for non‑party access to court audio records, notice to victims, and limits on dissemination — Smith v DPP (30 October 2025)...
Smith v DPP [2025] IESC 42: Conditional, Purpose‑Limited Access to Court Audio and Transcripts under Order 123—No “Direct Line” from Open Justice to Record Access

Smith v DPP [2025] IESC 42: Conditional, Purpose‑Limited Access to Court Audio and Transcripts under Order 123—No “Direct Line” from Open Justice to Record Access

Date: Nov 4, 2025
Smith v The Director of Public Prosecutions [2025] IESC 42: Conditional, Purpose‑Limited Access to Court Audio and Transcripts under Order 123—No “Direct Line” from Open Justice to Record Access...
Ambulatory Defined Terms and Deferred Consideration: Court of Appeal holds that “reduction/release” of a Zone of Influence—not mere permission—triggers payment; rectification requires a proved outward accord (Westfield Park Ltd v Harworth Estates Investments Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1374)

Ambulatory Defined Terms and Deferred Consideration: Court of Appeal holds that “reduction/release” of a Zone of Influence—not mere permission—triggers payment; rectification requires a proved outward accord (Westfield Park Ltd v Harworth Estates Investments Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1374)

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Ambulatory Defined Terms and Deferred Consideration: “Reduction/Release” of a Zone of Influence—not Mere Permission—Triggers Payment; Rectification Requires a Proved Outward Accord Introduction In...
Consequences, Not Formalism: Return-Date Omission Not Fatal to Parliamentary Election Petitions; Retrospective Validation of Service Under CPR 6.15(2) Permitted — Commentary on Moore v Royal Mail Group Ltd & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 1378

Consequences, Not Formalism: Return-Date Omission Not Fatal to Parliamentary Election Petitions; Retrospective Validation of Service Under CPR 6.15(2) Permitted — Commentary on Moore v Royal Mail Group Ltd & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 1378

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Consequences, Not Formalism: Return-Date Omission Not Fatal to Parliamentary Election Petitions; Retrospective Validation of Service Under CPR 6.15(2) Permitted Case: Moore v Royal Mail Group Ltd &...
Re D (Threshold Findings and Final Orders at IRH): No “Deemed Proof” of Threshold — Court of Appeal mandates express s.31(2) findings and adequate reasons; Standard Form Orders para 148 to be reviewed

Re D (Threshold Findings and Final Orders at IRH): No “Deemed Proof” of Threshold — Court of Appeal mandates express s.31(2) findings and adequate reasons; Standard Form Orders para 148 to be reviewed

Date: Nov 1, 2025
Re D (Threshold Findings and Final Orders at IRH): No “Deemed Proof” of Threshold — Court of Appeal mandates express s.31(2) findings and adequate reasons; Standard Form Orders para 148 to be...
R v BVA [2025] EWCA Crim 1359: Covert filming integral to the sexual act can vitiate consent under section 74 SOA 2003

R v BVA [2025] EWCA Crim 1359: Covert filming integral to the sexual act can vitiate consent under section 74 SOA 2003

Date: Oct 30, 2025
R v BVA [2025] EWCA Crim 1359: Covert filming integral to the sexual act can vitiate consent under section 74 SOA 2003 Court: Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), 29 October 2025 Introduction This...
Wilson v HB (SWA) Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1360: Schedules of Loss cannot expand the pleadings; in agreed no‑cost remediation cases only residual “blight” is potentially recoverable

Wilson v HB (SWA) Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1360: Schedules of Loss cannot expand the pleadings; in agreed no‑cost remediation cases only residual “blight” is potentially recoverable

Date: Oct 30, 2025
Wilson v HB (SWA) Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1360: Schedules of Loss cannot expand the pleadings; in agreed no‑cost remediation cases only residual “blight” is potentially recoverable Introduction This...
From Tick‑Boxes to Evidence: Court of Appeal clarifies COBS 3.5 assessments and requires the FOS to consider contributory negligence where client misstatements enable access to high‑risk CFD strategies

From Tick‑Boxes to Evidence: Court of Appeal clarifies COBS 3.5 assessments and requires the FOS to consider contributory negligence where client misstatements enable access to high‑risk CFD strategies

Date: Oct 30, 2025
From Tick‑Boxes to Evidence: Court of Appeal clarifies COBS 3.5 assessments and requires the FOS to consider contributory negligence where client misstatements enable access to high‑risk CFD...
K‑H (Children) (Care Orders: Proportionality): Proven Facts, Not Suspicions — Re‑centering Risk and Proportionality in Public Law Care Decisions

K‑H (Children) (Care Orders: Proportionality): Proven Facts, Not Suspicions — Re‑centering Risk and Proportionality in Public Law Care Decisions

Date: Oct 30, 2025
K‑H (Children) (Care Orders: Proportionality): Proven Facts, Not Suspicions — Re‑centering Risk and Proportionality in Public Law Care Decisions Citation: [2025] EWCA Civ 1368 Court: Court of Appeal...
Only Binding Law Creates a “Special Legal Regime” for Article 13 PVD; Non‑Taxation of NHS Hospital Parking Significantly Distorts Competition

Only Binding Law Creates a “Special Legal Regime” for Article 13 PVD; Non‑Taxation of NHS Hospital Parking Significantly Distorts Competition

Date: Oct 30, 2025
Only Binding Law Creates a “Special Legal Regime” for Article 13 PVD; Non‑Taxation of NHS Hospital Parking Significantly Distorts Competition Introduction In Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation...
Excess Domestic Custody Alone Is Not Oppressive: Broad-Fairness Review of Section 14 and High Threshold for Article 3 Mental-Health Objections in Extradition (Gavenaite v Lord Advocate)

Excess Domestic Custody Alone Is Not Oppressive: Broad-Fairness Review of Section 14 and High Threshold for Article 3 Mental-Health Objections in Extradition (Gavenaite v Lord Advocate)

Date: Oct 30, 2025
Excess Domestic Custody Alone Is Not Oppressive: Broad-Fairness Review of Section 14 and High Threshold for Article 3 Mental-Health Objections in Extradition Case: Appeal under section 26 of the...
No Implied Anti‑Whip Rule in Article 12: Council Nomination Votes for the Presidency Are Political and Non‑Justiciable — Stack v The Attorney General & Ors [2025] IEHC 561

No Implied Anti‑Whip Rule in Article 12: Council Nomination Votes for the Presidency Are Political and Non‑Justiciable — Stack v The Attorney General & Ors [2025] IEHC 561

Date: Oct 30, 2025
No Implied Anti‑Whip Rule in Article 12: Council Nomination Votes for the Presidency Are Political and Non‑Justiciable — Stack v The Attorney General & Ors [2025] IEHC 561 Court: High Court of...
Confirmation without Merits Review under s.74: High Court reaffirms Wednesbury-limited oversight, clarifies that cancellation cannot be coupled with conditions, and endorses cancellation notwithstanding a medical-disability defence

Confirmation without Merits Review under s.74: High Court reaffirms Wednesbury-limited oversight, clarifies that cancellation cannot be coupled with conditions, and endorses cancellation notwithstanding a medical-disability defence

Date: Oct 30, 2025
Confirmation without Merits Review under s.74: High Court reaffirms Wednesbury-limited oversight, clarifies that cancellation cannot be coupled with conditions, and endorses cancellation...
Abuse of Process Precludes Public‑Interest Costs Relief: Commentary on Browne v Registrar General of Fishing Boats & Ors [No. 2] [2025] IEHC 553

Abuse of Process Precludes Public‑Interest Costs Relief: Commentary on Browne v Registrar General of Fishing Boats & Ors [No. 2] [2025] IEHC 553

Date: Oct 29, 2025
Abuse of Process Precludes Public‑Interest Costs Relief: Browne v The Registrar General of Fishing Boats & Ors [No. 2] [2025] IEHC 553 Introduction This High Court costs judgment, delivered by...
NCL v R: Balanced Summing-Up and Safeguarded s.34 CJPOA Directions as Pre-conditions to Fairness

NCL v R: Balanced Summing-Up and Safeguarded s.34 CJPOA Directions as Pre-conditions to Fairness

Date: Oct 29, 2025
NCL v R: Balanced Summing-Up and Safeguarded s.34 CJPOA Directions as Pre-conditions to Fairness Citation: [2025] EWCA Crim 1352 Court: England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Judgment...
F v F and A [2025] CSOH 99: The Section 18 Tripartite Test Confirmed, and a Fair‑Value Transfer Method for Part‑Inherited Homes

F v F and A [2025] CSOH 99: The Section 18 Tripartite Test Confirmed, and a Fair‑Value Transfer Method for Part‑Inherited Homes

Date: Oct 28, 2025
F v F and A [2025] CSOH 99: The Section 18 Tripartite Test Confirmed, and a Fair‑Value Transfer Method for Part‑Inherited Homes Introduction In F against F and A [2025] CSOH 99, Lord Stuart (Outer...
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.