A challenge to a decision of the lower courts can be brought in various ways, including by way of appeal, judicial review or an appeal by way of case stated. This Practice Note is concerned with appeals by way of case stated. For detailed guidance on appeals in criminal matters, see: Criminal appeals—overview. For further information on judicial review proceedings, see Practice Note: Judicial review of magistrates' court and Crown Court decisions. Challenging a decision which is wrong in law or in excess of jurisdiction An appeal by way of case stated is an appeal to a superior court on the basis of a set of facts (case) specified by the inferior court (stated) for the superior court to make a decision on the application of the law to those facts. The appeal identifies the decision in issue, the questions of law or jurisdiction on which the opinion of the High Court is asked and should include a succinct summary of the nature and history of the proceedings, the lower court's relevant findings

The High Court’s Queens Bench division has dismissed Richard Slade and Co Ltd’s (Appellant) appeal against Murray (Respondent), maintaining that the Respondent should not bear the costs of two separate bills referred to the ‘counsel’s fees Bill’  and the ‘Hodders fees Bill’ respectively.

Private Client analysis: Costs are a hot topic in litigation over estates. The appeal case of Lumb v Lumb provides a cautionary reminder of the costs risks of probate disputes. Stuart had entered a caveat in the estate of his mother, Mrs Lumb, but not proceeded to advance his claim. His brother, Michael, therefore issued legal proceedings seeking pronouncement in solemn form in favour of Mrs Lumb’s last Will. Michael subsequently applied for summary judgment. This was granted, however, unusually the judge did not grant Michael his costs saying he was required to follow CPR 57.7(5)(b) which required no order for costs unless it was considered there were no reasonable grounds for opposing the Will. Michael appealed this unsatisfactory decision on costs. The appeal court agreed with him, reviewing well known probate cases on costs and interpreting CPR 57.7(5)(b) more narrowly, and in light of the costs ethos of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Life sciences analysis: The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s decision in favour of AstraZeneca in relation to payments due under an agreement for the development of a new Alzheimer’s treatment drug. The Court of Appeal held that compounds discovered after the collaboration between the two parties had ended were not discovered as part of a programme between the parties, therefore the appellants were not entitled to milestone payments under the agreement. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and Astex Therapeutics was ordered to pay back payments already received and were held not to be entitled to any further payments.

The interests of justice test The single test for allowing an appeal against conviction is whether the conviction is unsafe. If the grounds of appeal submitted refer to fresh evidence which was not adduced at trial, the same test applies. Under section 23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (CAA 1968), the Court of Appeal has the power to admit fresh evidence if it is deemed necessary or expedient in the interests of justice. This applies to appeals against conviction, appeals against sentence and references to the Court of Appeal by the Home Secretary. These powers extend to hearings of applications for leave to appeal as well as the appeal itself or an appeal against the findings of a Newton hearing. CAA 1968, s 23 only comes into operation if a right to appeal under CAA 1968, s 1 exists. Once the Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal against conviction under CAA 1968, s 1, the court has no jurisdiction to hear a subsequent application for leave to appeal, even where the

An independent panel deciding appeals against refusal by the admission authority of admission to a state school.

Appeal No. HU/1234/2025 IN THE FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER Between: MAGGIE SMITH Appellant – and – Secretary of state for the home department Respondent ___________________ SCHEDULE 1 — FINANCIAL EVIDENCE ___________________ Introduction References

This Checklist should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: Starting an appeal in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division (CACD) and Conducting an appeal in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division (CACD). All practitioners advising on appeals to the Court of Appeal should be familiar with: • Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, Pts 36–42 • Criminal Practice Directions 2023 at [10: Appeals to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division] • Guide to proceedings in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division Appeal following conviction in the Crown Court • obtain an advice in writing about the merits and grounds of appeal (see: Common grounds for appealing conviction and sentence—checklist) • complete the relevant notice of appeal (Form NG), indicating where the appellant wishes to apply for bail and legal aid (an easy read version of application for leave to appeal against conviction

This Practice Note covers applications for permission to appeal and notices of appeal filed on or after 2 December 2024 which are governed by the Supreme Court Rules 2024 (SCR 2024), SI 2024/949 and the Supreme Court Practice Directions (SCR PD). For guidance on the Supreme Court Rules which apply to appeals proceeding before 2 December 2024 or where the application for permission to appeal or notice of appeal was filed before 2 December 2024, see Practice Notes: Supreme Court—permission to appeal—appeals pre-2 December 2024 [Archived], Supreme Court—completing an application for permission or notice of appeal and how to respond—appeals pre-2 December 2024 [Archived] and Supreme Court—starting and managing the appeal—appeals pre-2 December 2024. Statutory basis of appeal to the Supreme Court The United Kingdom Supreme Court (also known as the UKSC) was established by Part 3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 which came into force on 1 October 2009. The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction corresponds to that of its predecessor, the House of Lords (HL). In addition, the Supreme Court hears appeals regarding

Law360, London: The Court of Appeal's decision to endorse the validity of litigation-financing agreements devised to sidestep a Supreme Court ruling that upended class action funding provides certainty over what is allowed, but lawyers remain wary that further legislative changes are likely.

Specified decisions as made by the Secretary of State or immigration officers, as exhaustively listed in the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (NIAA 2002), s 82(2), against which a right of appeal lies to the First-tier Tribunal under NIAA 2002, s 82(1).

This Practice Note outlines the procedure for appealing a decision made by Revenue Scotland in relation to any of the Scottish devolved taxes. Where relevant, it also compares the Scottish procedure to the procedure for appeals against a decision by HMRC in the UK tribunals. The UK procedure is explained in further detail in Practice Note: Appealing an HMRC decision. It is important to note that there are time limits at all stages of the appeal process, so failing to adhere to a time limit may mean that the right of appeal is lost. Additionally, Revenue Scotland’s approach to tax disputes, including the conduct of litigation and its approach to settling disputes, is guided by the principles set out in the Revenue Scotland Settlement and Litigation Principles. For an introduction to the Scottish tax tribunal system, which deals with appeals in devolved tax matters in Scotland, see Practice Note: Scotland: devolved taxes and the Scottish tribunal system. See also Practice Note: Devolved taxes in the UK—Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. For