Visit JCPC
The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom
We are the final court of appeal in the UK for civil cases, and for criminal cases from England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Supreme Court hears cases of the greatest public or constitutional importance affecting the whole population.
The Court is open today from 9.00AM to 4.30PM
LISTINGS
Upcoming
- Wrench (Respondent) v FirstRand Bank Limited (London Branch) t/a MotoNovo Finance (Appellant)
UK Supreme Court
Hearing
3 April 2025
Lord Reed,
Lord Hodge,
Lord Lloyd-Jones,
Lord Briggs,
Lord Hamblen
(1) When acting as credit brokers, do car dealers owe consumers a “disinterested” and/or fiduciary duty to provide information, advice or recommendation? (2) If so, were the payments of commissions by the lenders to the car dealers secret such that the lenders become primary wrongdoers? (3) Can the lenders be liable in the tort of bribery? If so, what is the correct approach to remedies? (4) If there was sufficient disclosure of the commission to negate secrecy, was there insufficient disclosure to procure the consumers’ fully informed consent to the payment such that the lenders are liable as accessories for procuring the credit brokers’ breach of duty? (5) Can insufficient disclosure also suffice to make the relationship between lender and consumer “unfair” for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974?
Linked cases
- Johnson (Respondent) v FirstRand Bank Limited (London Branch) t/a MotoNovo Finance (Appellant)
UK Supreme Court
Hearing
3 April 2025
Lord Reed,
Lord Hodge,
Lord Lloyd-Jones,
Lord Briggs,
Lord Hamblen
(1) When acting as credit brokers, do car dealers owe consumers a “disinterested” and/or fiduciary duty to provide information, advice or recommendation? (2) If so, were the payments of commissions by the lenders to the car dealers secret such that the lenders become primary wrongdoers? (3) Can the lenders be liable in the tort of bribery? If so, what is the correct approach to remedies? (4) If there was sufficient disclosure of the commission to negate secrecy, was there insufficient disclosure to procure the consumers’ fully informed consent to the payment such that the lenders are liable as accessories for procuring the credit brokers’ breach of duty? (5) Can insufficient disclosure also suffice to make the relationship between lender and consumer “unfair” for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974?
Linked cases
- Hopcraft and another (Respondents) v Close Brothers Limited (Appellant)
UK Supreme Court
Hearing
3 April 2025
Lord Reed,
Lord Hodge,
Lord Lloyd-Jones,
Lord Briggs,
Lord Hamblen
(1) When acting as credit brokers, do car dealers owe consumers a “disinterested” and/or fiduciary duty to provide information, advice or recommendation? (2) If so, were the payments of commissions by the lenders to the car dealers secret such that the lenders become primary wrongdoers? (3) Can the lenders be liable in the tort of bribery? If so, what is the correct approach to remedies? (4) If there was sufficient disclosure of the commission to negate secrecy, was there insufficient disclosure to procure the consumers’ fully informed consent to the payment such that the lenders are liable as accessories for procuring the credit brokers’ breach of duty? (5) Can insufficient disclosure also suffice to make the relationship between lender and consumer “unfair” for the purposes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974?
Linked cases
- Wallace I Rolle and another (Appellants) v Town Court Management Co (Respondent) (Bahamas)
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
Judgment
3 April 2025
Lord Hodge,
Lord Hamblen,
Lord Leggatt,
Lord Burrows,
Lord Stephens
(1) Does the Law of Property and Conveyancing (Condominium) Act 1965 (the “1965 Act”) prohibit the delegation of the Respondent’s statutory duties? (2) Do “contributions” under the 1965 Act include management fees charged by a third party carrying out the Respondent’s statutory management functions? (3) Did the trial judge err in refusing to award interest on the damages awarded to the Appellants?
- Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (Respondent) v Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (Appellant)
UK Supreme Court
Hearing
7 April 2025
Lord Hodge,
Lord Hamblen,
Lord Burrows,
Lord Richards,
Lady Simler
Did the Court of Appeal err: (i) in its conclusions as to the objective and correct interpretation of the legislation applicable to determining whether the Trust was a taxable person for the purposes of Value Added Tax (“VAT”). (ii) in its understanding of the facts that need to be proved in order to determine whether there is a significant distortion of competition under the applicable legislation.
THINGS TO DO
Take a tour of the Court
We offer a range of tours to suit individuals and groups, including in-person and virtual tours.
Exhibitions and events
Find out what's on, including our permanent exhibition about the history and work of the Court.
Our cafe
The UK Supreme Court cafe is open to the public Monday to Friday between 9am and 4pm.
SPEECHES
LATEST JUDGMENTS
2 April 2025
R (Appellant) v Layden (Respondent)26 March 2025
R (on the application of The Spitalfields Historic Building Trust) (Appellant) v London Borough of Tower Hamlets and another (Respondents)19 March 2025
Rukhadze and others (Appellants) v Recovery Partners GP Ltd and another (Respondents)6 March 2025
The Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia (Cultural Bureau) (Appellant) v Costantine (Respondent)- In the matter of an application for Judicial Review by JR123 (Appellant) (Northern Ireland)