Civil appeals to the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is the final court of appeal in the UK for civil cases. It hears cases of the greatest public or constitutional importance and plays an important role in the development of United Kingdom law. It hears appeals on arguable points of law from the civil division of the Court of Appeal and, in some very limited cases, the High Court.

The Supreme Court has its own set of rules, the Supreme Court Rules (referred to in this overview as 'SCR') and its own set of Practice Directions (referred to in this overview as ‘SCR PDs’). These are entirely separate to the Civil Procedure Rules, which govern procedure in the County Courts, High Court and Court of Appeal.

The SCR were enacted by the Supreme Court Rules 2024, SI 2024/949, which revoke and replace the Supreme Court Rules 2009 (referred to in this Practice Note as ‘old SCR’). For an introduction to the Supreme Court Rules 2024, see Practice Note: Guide to the Supreme Court Rules 2024.

The Supreme Court has a website on which much information is available

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest PI & Clinical Negligence News

The Law Society’s AI strategy and response to government

The Law Society has responded to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology’s call for evidence on the AI Growth Lab, stressing the need for a proportionate regulatory approach that supports innovation while maintaining professional standards. In a press release dated 6 January 2026, the sector’s widespread willingness to embrace lawtech was highlighted, with two-thirds of lawyers said to ‘already use AI tools in their work’, alongside an ongoing uncertainty as to the risks and ‘exact requirements for data security, oversight and liability’. Separately, The Law Society’s ‘Introduction to lawtech’ guide published on 29 December 2025 observed that client demand for ‘greater efficiency, transparency and cost control, especially in corporate legal services’ has been a key driver for AI usage, with larger firms leading adoption and medium-sized firms catching up. The Law Society says it will continue to work with the government to ensure AI benefits both firms and clients, with its strategy focused on the following three key outcomes: i) innovation in legal service delivery; ii) an effective AI regulatory landscape, influenced by the legal sector; and iii) integrity through responsible AI use, supporting the rule of law and access to justice. Links to consultation responses and downloadable submissions on a range of AI-related issues, including data processing, ransomware resilience and the use of AI outputs in criminal proceedings (among others), are included on The Law Society’s ‘AI and lawtech: government policy and regulation’ page (updated on 18 December 2025), which also invites members to share their views and identify any gaps in support or guidance.

Master of the Rolls updates solicitors’ guideline hourly rates for 2026

The Master of the Rolls has announced updated guideline hourly rates for solicitors, effective in England and Wales from 1 January 2026, implementing a 2.28% uplift to reflect more recent service producer price inflation figures up to Q1 2025. Sir Geoffrey Vos, as Head of Civil Justice, has confirmed that the update follows the Civil Justice Council’s recommendation as part of its strategic review of costs, following a previous 6.66% inflationary uplift applied in January 2024, and has indicated that a Civil Justice Council working group is examining whether new guideline rates should also be developed for counsel’s fees and complex commercial work, with an interim report expected later in 2026.

Amendments to UKSC and JCPC Practice Directions

Practice Directions for the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) were amended on 22 December 2025. The principal change reflects routine online publication of Statements of Facts and Issues and Written Cases. These documents no longer need to include counsel’s signature; a printed name is sufficient, and signature wording has been removed from the relevant Practice Direction paragraphs and the Electronic Bundle guidance.

Covert recordings of neuropsychological testing (Celikdemir v PGR Timber Ltd)

PI & Clinical Negligence analysis: In a personal injury claim, the court was faced with an application by the claimant to rely on a covert recording of the neuropsychological testing administered by the defendant’s expert and a subsequent report produced by the claimant’s expert critiquing the defendant’s expert’s approach. After considering the relevant legal principles, including the earlier case of Mustard v Flower & Ord as well as the factual issues weighing on either side of the balance in the present case, His Honour Judge Shanks (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) decided to admit the evidence. This case is therefore a further endorsement, albeit somewhat reluctantly, of covert recordings of medical expert assessments, which is now becoming common practice in personal injury litigation. Written by Peter Hale, barrister at 12 King's Bench Walk

View PI & Clinical Negligence by content type :

News