Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

Upcoming

• UK Supreme Court

  Judgment

  26 March 2025

  R (on the application of The Spitalfields Historic Building Trust) (Appellant) v London Borough of Tower Hamlets and another (Respondents)

  Lord Reed,

  Lord Sales,

  Lord Hamblen,

  Lady Rose,

  Lord Richards

  Is it lawful for a local authority's constitution to restrict voting by members on a deferred application for planning permission to those who had been present at the meeting(s) at which the application had previously been considered?

  ---

• UK Supreme Court

  Hearing

  25 March 2025

  R v Hayes (Appellant)

  Lord Reed,

  Lord Hodge,

  Lord Lloyd-Jones,

  Lord Leggatt,

  Lady Simler

  (1) Is a LIBOR or EURIBOR submission automatically dishonest if it is influenced by a trading advantage? (2) Must a LIBOR or EURIBOR submission be of the single cheapest rate at which the panel or prime bank could borrow at the time of the submissions or can it be a rate selected from within a range of potential borrowing rates?

  Linked cases

  UKSC/2024/0088 R v Palombo (Appellant)

  Legal issue

  ---

• UK Supreme Court

  Hearing

  25 March 2025

  R v Palombo (Appellant)

  Lord Reed,

  Lord Hodge,

  Lord Lloyd-Jones,

  Lord Leggatt,

  Lady Simler

  (1) Is a LIBOR or EURIBOR submission automatically dishonest if it is influenced by a trading advantage? (2) Must a LIBOR or EURIBOR submission be of the single cheapest rate at which the panel or prime bank could borrow at the time of the submissions or can it be a rate selected from within a range of potential borrowing rates?

  Linked cases

  UKSC/2024/0087 R v Hayes (Appellant)

  Legal issue

  ---

• The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council

  Hearing

  31 March 2025

  Aquapoint LP (in Official Liquidation) (Appellant) v Xiaohu Fan (Respondent) (Cayman Islands)

  Lord Briggs,

  Lord Sales,

  Lord Leggat,

  Lord Richards,

  Dame Janice Pereira

  1) Whether the just and equitable winding-up jurisdiction may be used to alter, amend or supplement the normal effect of the law of contract in circumstances where the parties have entered into a contract regulating their relationship and where that contract expressly makes provision for the matter or matters giving rise to the Respondent’s complain. (2) Whether the Respondent’s complaint is governed exclusively by the law of contract. (3)Whether it was a breach of the duty to act in good faith for the General Partner to rely on entire-agreement clause in the 2017 Agreement to decline to give effect to assurances made outside of that Agreement. (4) Whether the reliance by the General Partner on the terms of the 2017 Agreement in not transferring the shares was misconduct in the management and affairs of the Partnership giving rise to a loss of trust and confidence as to justify the making of a winding up order on the just and equitable ground. (5) Whether the General Partner has breached its duty to act in good faith by refusing to transfer the shares in Legend Cayman to the Respondent so as to justify the making of a winding up order on the just and equitable ground. (6) Whether there is an adequate alternative remedy available to the Respondent by bringing an action for breach of duty under Section 19(1), Exempted Limited Partnership Act.

  ---

• UK Supreme Court

  Hearing

  1 April 2025

  Johnson (Respondent) v FirstRand Bank Limited (London Branch) t/a MotoNovo Finance (Appellant)

  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

  UKSC/2024/0157 Hopcraft and another (Respondents) v Close Brothers Limited (Appellant)

  Legal issue

  UKSC/2024/0159 Wrench (Respondent) v FirstRand Bank Limited (London Branch) t/a MotoNovo Finance (Appellant)

  Legal Issue

  ---