The table lists judgments made by the court and the opinions of the judges in each case. Judges are treated as having concurred in another's judgment when they either formally attach themselves to the judgment of another or speak only to acknowledge their concurrence with one or more judges. Any judgment which reaches a conclusion that differs from the majority on one or more major points of the appeal has been treated as dissent.
All dates are for 2014 unless expressly stated otherwise.
Table key
Delivered a judgment (majority)
Concurred in the judgment of another justice (majority)
Delivered a judgment (dissenting)
Concurred in the judgment of another justice (dissent)
^The chart shows the judgment of the court in the case of P. Two other appeals (from MIG and MEG) were held concurrently and allowed by a majority of 4 to 3 (Lords
Clarke,
Carnwath and
Hodge dissenting).
^The chart shows the judgment by the court in the appeals by Nicklinson and Lamb. It also unanimously allowed an appeal by the
DPP and dismissed a cross-appeal by Martin.
^Lord Collins also sat on this case. He agreed with the majority.
^Lord Collins also sat on this case. He gave a judgment for the majority that
Lord Sumption agreed with.
^The chart shows the decision for the appeal. The decision on the cross-appeal was by a majority of four to one (
Lady Hale dissenting).
^The chart shows the judgment of the court in the appeal of Haney, Kaiyam and Massey. The
article 5 appeal by Robinson was dismissed by a majority of four to one (
Lord Mance dissenting).