ABC is the older sibling of DEF, who is the subject of a Compulsory Supervision Order. At two Children’s Hearings in 2017, contact directions affecting ABC’s relationship with DEF were continued. ABC was not a relevant person for these hearings and had not been notified prior to the first of these hearings taking place. ABC argues that the decision-making process for these hearings did not provide him with the requisite Article 8 protection and that the interference with his family life with DEF was therefore unlawful. The Lord Ordinary did not accept that the decisions were unlawful, but considered it necessary to read down section 81(3) of the 2011 Act. The Inner House dismissed ABC’s appeal but allowed a cross-appeal to the effect that section 81(3) did not require to be read down. ABC now seeks permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Bresco agreed to perform electrical works for Lonsdale in 2014. Bresco is now insolvent and Lonsdale claims it is owed over £300,000 compensation by Bresco. Bresco says it is owed money for work done. Bresco’s liquidator referred the dispute to adjudication but Lonsdale say adjudication is not available in these circumstances.

Mr Fowler is a qualified diver and a resident of South Africa. In the tax years 2011/2012 and 2012/2013, he undertook diving engagements in the waters of the UK continental shelf. The DTC, to which the UK and South Africa are parties, came into force on 17 December 2002. The dispute concerns whether the UK or South Africa is entitled to levy tax on Mr Fowler’s income derived from his diving activities during those two tax years. It is common ground between the parties that, if Mr Fowler was self-employed, the answer to the question is South Africa. However, it is in dispute whether he was in fact self-employed. The First-tier Tribunal ("FTT") directed the trial of a preliminary issue concerning the application of the DTC and the UK’s domestic tax legislation. That issue was addressed on the factual assumption that Mr Fowler was an employee during those years. Judge Brannan in the FTT answered that question in Mr Fowler’s favour, but Marcus Smith J, in the Upper Tribunal, reversed that decision. The Court of Appeal, by a majority, allowed the appeal by Mr Fowler. The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs now appeal to the Supreme Court.