2013 Judgments of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

This is a list of the 81 judgments given by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in the year 2013. They are ordered by neutral citation.

The table lists judgments made by the court and the opinions of the judges in each case. Judges are treated as having concurred in another's judgment when they either formally attach themselves to the judgment of another or speak only to acknowledge their concurrence with one or more judges. Any judgment which reaches a conclusion that differs from the majority on one or more major points of the appeal has been treated as dissent.

All dates are for 2013 unless expressly stated otherwise.

Table key[]

Delivered a judgment (majority)

Concurred in the judgment of another justice (majority)

Delivered a judgment (dissenting)

Concurred in the judgment of another justice (dissent)

Did not participate in the decision

2013 judgments[]

Case name	Citation	Argued	Decided	Neuberger	Hope	Walker	Hale	Mance	Kerr	Clarke	Wilson	Sumption	Reed	Carnwath	Hughes	Toulson	Hodge
^[1]	[2013] UKSC 1	5-7 November 2012	23 January
	[2013] UKSC 2	6 December 2012	23 January
	[2013] UKSC 3	27-28 November 2012	23 January
	[2013] UKSC 4	5 December 2012	30 January
VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp^[2]	[2013] UKSC 5	12-14 November 2012	6 February
^[3]	[2013] UKSC 6	21-22 November 2012	6 February
	[2013] UKSC 7	10-11 December 2012	13 February
	[2013] UKSC 8	21 January	20 February
^[1]	[2013] UKSC 9	17-18 December 2012	20 February
	[2013] UKSC 10	17 January	20 February
	[2013] UKSC 11	12-13 December 2012	27 February
	[2013] UKSC 12	30 January	27 February
	[2013] UKSC 13	4-5 February	27 February
	[2013] UKSC 14	4 December 2012	6 March
	[2013] UKSC 15	24-25 October 2012	13 March
	[2013] UKSC 16	15-16 January	13 March
	[2013] UKSC 17	17 January	20 March
Public Relations Consultants Association Ltd v The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd^[4]	[2013] UKSC 18	11-12 February	17 April
	[2013] UKSC 19	28 February	17 April
	[2013] UKSC 20	27 February	24 April
^[5]	[2013] UKSC 21	5-6 March	24 April
	[2013] UKSC 22	12-13 March	24 April
	[2013] UKSC 23	19-21 November 2012	1 May
	[2013] UKSC 24	21-24 January	1 May
	[2013] UKSC 25	7 March	1 May
Futter v The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs^[1]	[2013] UKSC 26	12-14 March	9 May
	[2013] UKSC 27	28-29 January	9 May
BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd v Neuberger Berman Europe Ltd	[2013] UKSC 28	25-26 February	9 May
	[2013] UKSC 29	13-14 February	15 May
	[2013] UKSC 30	15 April	22 May
	[2013] UKSC 31	24 April	22 May
Public Prosecution Service of Northern Ireland v Elliott	[2013] UKSC 32	22 April	22 May
	[2013] UKSC 33	25 February	12 June
Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd^[1]	[2013] UKSC 34	5-6 March	12 June
	[2013] UKSC 35	1-2 May	12 June
	[2013] UKSC 36	29-30 April	13 June
^[6]	[2013] UKSC 37	13 May	13 June
^[7]^[8]	[2013] UKSC 38	19-21 March	19 June
^[7]^[9]	[2013] UKSC 39	19-21 March	19 June
	[2013] UKSC 40	23 April	19 June
^[1]^[10]	[2013] UKSC 41	18-21 February	19 June
	[2013] UKSC 42	24-25 October 2012	20 June
R v Brown	[2013] UKSC 43	7 March	26 June
	[2013] UKSC 44	10-11 April	26 June
	[2013] UKSC 45	20-21 May	26 June
	[2013] UKSC 46	29-30 April	3 July
	[2013] UKSC 47	9 May	3 July
	[2013] UKSC 48	13 June	10 July
	[2013] UKSC 49	7-8 May	10 July
Benedetti v Sawiris	[2013] UKSC 50	26-28 February	17 July
	[2013] UKSC 51	5-6 June	17 July
	[2013] UKSC 52	14-16 May	24 July
	[2013] UKSC 53	19 June	24 July
	[2013] UKSC 54	4 December 2012	24 July
	[2013] UKSC 55	8 July	29 July
R v Hughes	[2013] UKSC 56	5 June	31 July
	[2013] UKSC 57	17-18 June	31 July
	[2013] UKSC 58	10 July	31 July
	[2013] UKSC 59	9 July	31 July
	[2013] UKSC 60	22-23 July	9 September
	[2013] UKSC 61	16-18 April	9 October
	[2013] UKSC 62	27 June	9 October
^[1]	[2013] UKSC 63	10-11 June	16 October
^[1]^[11]	[2013] UKSC 64	25-26 June	23 October
	[2013] UKSC 65	15 July	23 October
	[2013] UKSC 66	3-4 July	23 October
	[2013] UKSC 67	24 July	30 October
R (Reilly) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions	[2013] UKSC 68	29 July	30 October
	[2013] UKSC 69	3 October	6 November
	[2013] UKSC 70	8-9 July	6 November
	[2013] UKSC 71	16-17 July	20 November
	[2013] UKSC 72	3-4 July	20 November
Bull v Hall	[2013] UKSC 73	9-10 October	27 November
	[2013] UKSC 74	28 October	27 November
	[2013] UKSC 75	18 November	4 December
	[2013] UKSC 76	7 October	4 December
	[2013] UKSC 77	18 July	11 December
	[2013] UKSC 78	22 July	11 December
	[2013] UKSC 79	7-8 October	18 December
	[2013] UKSC 80	29 October	18 December
	[2013] UKSC 81	21 November	18 December

Notes[]

^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g An augmented panel of 7 judges sat in this case.
^ The chart shows the judgment on the first issue of jurisdiction. On the other two issues the justices unanimously dismissed the corporate veil appeal and unanimously discharged the freezing injunction.
^ The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He concurred with the majority.
^ The court did not make an order in this case but rather Lord Sumption gave a judgment of the court that referred the question to the Court of Justice of the European Union under Article 267 TFEU.
^ The Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Carloway, also sat on this case. He concurred with the majority judgment.
^ A diminished panel of three justices heard this case.
^ ^a ^b An augmented panel of 9 judges sat in this case.
^ The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He held with the majority that closed material procedures can be adopted by the Supreme Court but partially dissented by holding that such a procedure was not appropriate as regards the appeal in question.
^ The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He, like Lord Neuberger, held that appeal should be allowed but on the procedural grounds alone. Lord Carnwath conversely allowed the appeal but only on the substantive grounds.
^ The chart shows the judgments in respect of the article 2 issue and the question of combat immunity. The justices unanimously held that the case does fall within the UK's jurisdiction.
^ Lord Judge also sat on this case. He and Lord Neuberger gave the lead judgment for the majority.

Judges[]

Lord Walker served until 17 March 2013.
Lord Hope served until 26 June 2013. Lady Hale replaced him as Deputy President of the Supreme Court.
Lord Hughes became a justice on 9 April 2013. He replaced Lord Dyson who stepped down to become Master of the Rolls.
Lord Toulson became a justice on 9 April 2013. He replaced Lord Walker.
Lord Hodge became a justice on 1 October 2013. He replaced Lord Hope.

External links[]

Supreme Court decided cases, 2013

[7_judges-1] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g An augmented panel of 7 judges sat in this case.

[2] The chart shows the judgment on the first issue of jurisdiction. On the other two issues the justices unanimously dismissed the corporate veil appeal and unanimously discharged the freezing injunction.

[3] The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He concurred with the majority.

[4] The court did not make an order in this case but rather Lord Sumption gave a judgment of the court that referred the question to the Court of Justice of the European Union under Article 267 TFEU.

[5] The Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Carloway, also sat on this case. He concurred with the majority judgment.

[3_judges-6] A diminished panel of three justices heard this case.

[9_judges-7] An augmented panel of 9 judges sat in this case.

[8] The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He held with the majority that closed material procedures can be adopted by the Supreme Court but partially dissented by holding that such a procedure was not appropriate as regards the appeal in question.

[9] The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, also sat on this case. He, like Lord Neuberger, held that appeal should be allowed but on the procedural grounds alone. Lord Carnwath conversely allowed the appeal but only on the substantive grounds.

[10] The chart shows the judgments in respect of the article 2 issue and the question of combat immunity. The justices unanimously held that the case does fall within the UK's jurisdiction.

[11] Lord Judge also sat on this case. He and Lord Neuberger gave the lead judgment for the majority.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]