Did the lower courts err in law by not holding that the hip replacement product used for the Appellant’s hip replacement was defective within the terms of the Consumer Protection Act 1987?

What is the meaning and effect of paragraphs 20 and 27 of the Electronic Communications Code as set out in Schedule 3A to the Communications Act 2003?

Does the Upper Tribunal have jurisdiction to confer rights over land in favour of an operator under the Electronic Communications Code (the Code) where that operator has a Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (LTA 1954) protected tenancy and is in occupation of the land?

Does the Upper Tribunal have jurisdiction to confer rights, under the Electronic Communications Code ("the Code"), in relation to a particular site, on the Claimant in circumstances where a third party, namely Vodaphone, is currently in occupation of the site?

When an appellate court reviews a first instance decision concerning the proportionality of orders made under the courts’ obligations under the Human Rights Act 1998, is it necessary for the appellate court to undertake its own proportionality assessment of that decision?

A. Whether the execution of the Court of Appeal’s judgment and order should be stayed pending the resolution of this application for permission to appeal and, if permission is granted, pending the appeal.
B. In the proposed appeal:
                (i) What is the correct approach to an application to reconsider an order after it has been made, but before it has been sealed, 
                (ii) Whether the Court of Appeal erred by interfering in the judge’s exercise of her discretion in relation to the jurisdiction to reconsider an order, and
                (iii) Whether FAAN, the applicant seeking reconsideration of the order, required relief from sanctions under the Civil Procedure Rules in circumstances where the relevant order only permitted AIC to apply for enforcement of the arbitral award rather than to enforce it straight away if FAAN failed to comply with the order.