The Court of Appeal (Civil Division) – Live streaming of court hearings

Selected cases from the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) are now being live-streamed on the judiciary’s YouTube channel.

Live-streaming of selected cases began in November 2018 to improve public access to, and understanding of, the work of the courts. it is anticipated that every hearing in Court 71 (the Master of the Rolls’ court) will be live streamed.

View previous cases on the Court of Appeal video archive page.

Next Hearings:

Click on the case title to be taken directly to the relevant YouTube page

Wednesday 2nd & Thursday 3rd October 2019

Y (Limited) –v- X

This is an appeal by Y Limited (a multinational company) against a decision made on 9 August 2018 by the Employment Appeals Tribunal, holding that an email sent by a lawyer to Y Limited that contained legal advice on the dismissal of X (a lawyer employee) was not legally privileged.

Slade J held that the email advised Y Limited how to discriminate against X and “surmounted the high bar of iniquity”.

Y Limited submits that Slade J employed the wrong test for iniquity and misinterpreted the email.

Click here for Lower court Judgment:


Thursday 3rd October 2019

Vote Leave Ltd –v- The Electoral Commission and others

The Appellant appeals against the decision of the High Court to refuse permission to proceed with a Judicial Review challenging the decision of the Respondent (“the Commission”) to publish the report it published into the expenses made by the Appellant in connection with the 2016 EU referendum on 17th July 2018.

The case raises important issues in relation to the powers of the commission.


Tuesday 8th and Wednesday 9th October 2019

Gray –v- Mulberry Company (design) Ltd

This is an appeal against an order made by the Employment Appeal Tribunal dated 26 July 2018 dismissing the Claimant’s appeal from the Employment Tribunal’s decision dismissing the Claimant’s complaints of discrimination on the grounds of philosophical belief.

The Claimant was dismissed because she refused to sign a Copyright Agreement as a condition of continued employment. She declined to do so because of her professed belief in the “statutory human or moral right to own the copyright and moral rights of her own creative works and output”.

The issue was whether that belief amounted to a belief within the meaning of section 10(2) of the Equality Act 2010 and whether the C was the subject of indirect discrimination on the grounds of that belief.

The ET and EAT held that the C’s belief did not fall within s.10 of the 2010 Act.

Click here for Lower Court Judgment:


Tuesday 15th and Wednesday 16th October 2019

Berkeley Burke SIPP Administration Ltd –v- Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd and others

The Appellant, a provider and administrator of self invested personal pensions, challenged the final decision of the Ombudsman that concluded that the Appellant had not acted fairly and reasonably in its dealings with a client and ordered that it pay compensation. The client had invested in a “green oil” scheme in Cambodia that transpired to be a scam. The agreement expressly made clear that the pension administrator would not investigate or advise on the merits of the investment.

Click here for Lower Court Judgment:


17, 18, 22, 23, 24 & 25th October 2019

The London Boroughs of Hillingdon, Wandsworth, Richmond-Upon-Thames, Hammersmith & Fulham, The Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead, and Greenpeace Ltd v The Secretary of State for Transport & others

Heathrow Hub Ltd & Runway Innovations Ltd v The Secretary of State for Transport & others

Plan B Earth Ltd v The Secretary of State for Transport & others

Friends of the Earth Ltd v The Secretary of State for Transport & others

Heathrow is the busiest two-runway airport in the world, full to capacity with further, unfulfilled demand. Whether its capacity should be expanded by constructing a third runway has been a long-standing question of national importance and acute political controversy. These claims challenge the Government policy of supporting such expansion.

Click here for Lower Court Judgments:


5th November 2019

Curo Places Ltd –v- Walker

Second appeal in a claim that concerned an allegation of anti-social behaviour in terms of noise nuisance against the tenant/Respondent under the Housing Act 1988 and an application for a possession order in respect to the let property by the landlord/Appellant.

Click here for Lower Court Judgment:


6th November 2019

Thirunavukkrasu –v- Brar & another

Second appeal in relation to a landlord/tenant dispute. The Applicants were landlords to the Respondent in respect to a commercial property. The Applicants purported to forfeit the Lease by re-entering the property. The Respondent issued a claim seeking a declaration that the forfeiture was unlawful, damages for trespass and breach of covenant and damages for conversion of the Respondent’s goods.

Click here for Lower Court Judgment:


Court 71

  • View the live stream from Court 71 directly on YouTube here.

Court 73

  • View the live stream from Court 73 directly on YouTube here.

Court 76

  • View the live stream from Court 76 directly on YouTube here.


Previous Court of Appeal (Civil Division) hearings

You can view previous cases on the Court of Appeal video archive page


Did you find what you were looking for?