Law firm

Arnold & Porter

Arnold & Porter is named as solicitors in at least 68 UK judgments from 2004 to 2026, most often in public and administrative law and intellectual property.

68
judgments
19
in the last five years
6
in the Supreme Court or Privy Council
11
in the Court of Appeal

Practice areas

  • Public and administrative law20
  • Intellectual property12
  • Public international law and sanctions8
  • Arbitration8
  • Professional discipline and regulation6
  • Cross-border disputes6
  • Civil liberties and human rights5
  • Banking and finance4

Courts

  • Supreme Court4
  • Privy Council2
  • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)11
  • High Court48
  • Upper Tribunal3

Counsel most often instructed

  • Jemima Stratford7
  • Peter Webster7
  • James Abrahams6
  • Alex Barden4
  • Kelyn Bacon4
  • Mark Tushingham4
  • Andrew Fulton3
  • Emily MacKenzie3

Judgments by year

  • 20262
  • 20252
  • 20244
  • 20238
  • 20223
  • 20211
  • 20204
  • 20194
  • 20184
  • 20174
  • 20165
  • 20151
  • 20141
  • 20133
  • 20123
  • 20112
  • 20103
  • 20092
  • 20081
  • 20072

Cases later courts cite most

Cases Arnold & Porter acted in that later judgments cite most often.

Date Case Cited by
5 Jul 2018
[2018] EWHC 1715 (Ch) · High Court: Chancery Division
A company is not a quasi-partnership merely because it is a successful family business. Equitable constraints on legal shareholder rights require a mutual…
35
28 Mar 2007
[2007] EWCA Civ 247 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Copyright in a literary work protects its original expression, including the selection, arrangement and development of material. It does not confer a monopoly…
15
20 Dec 2021
[2021] UKSC 57 · Supreme Court
An unequivocal executive statement recognising a foreign head of state conclusively binds the courts under the one voice principle. Its meaning cannot be…
13
29 Nov 2010
[2010] EWHC 3110 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
Where a Member State decides whether to impose export restrictions in a field closely regulated by European Union law, it is implementing Union law and must…
9
21 Dec 2004
[2004] EWHC 2985 (Ch) · High Court: Chancery Division
Copyright protects discrete artistic works, not general design themes, styles, formats or ideas. A claimant must identify the particular work said to have been…
8
28 May 2010
[2010] EWHC 1237 (Ch) · High Court: Chancery Division
In a quia timet passing off claim, the claimant must establish goodwill, a misrepresentation likely to deceive, and likely damage. The court assesses the…
8
26 Jan 2005
[2005] EWHC 283 (Ch) · High Court: Chancery Division
The discretion to award interest on costs is broad. It may be exercised from dates before judgment where that is necessary to compensate the receiving party…
7
8 Mar 2024
[2024] EWHC 503 (Comm) · High Court: Commercial Court
Under s.73 of the Arbitration Act 1996, a jurisdictional objection must be identified with sufficient substance and maintained before the tribunal. A general…
7
25 Mar 2020
[2020] EWCA Civ 449 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
A policy encouraging off-label use of a cheaper medicine is lawful where realistic and lawful methods of implementation exist. Compounded medicine falls…
4
10 Aug 2007
[2007] EWHC 1941 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
In a structured consultation, fairness requires sufficient information to enable an affected participant to give an intelligent response. It does not…
4

Recent cases

Date Case Cited by
23 Feb 2026
[2026] EWHC 368 (Comm) · High Court: Commercial Court
For the purposes of a treaty jurisdiction clause, “measures” is not confined to formal legislative, regulatory or administrative acts. It may include informal…
1
22 Jan 2026
[2026] EWCA Civ 23 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Regulation 153 of the Employment and Support Allowance Regulations 2008 permits continued contributory ESA during a temporary absence abroad only where the…
17 Jul 2025
[2025] EWCA Civ 905 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Whether a treaty condition limits an investor’s right to arbitrate is a question of international-law interpretation. Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of…
26 Jun 2025
[2025] UKUT 203 (TCC) · Upper Tribunal: Tax and Chancery Chamber
A senior manager acts recklessly, and therefore without integrity, where he knows that statements supplied to the regulator are inaccurate, appreciates the…
3
4 Dec 2024
[2024] UKUT 394 (TCC) · Upper Tribunal: Tax and Chancery Chamber
In a regulatory reference, relevant evidence is necessary but insufficient to justify directing a witness to give evidence. The Tribunal must consider whether…
1
1 Aug 2024
[2024] EWHC 2037 (Comm) · High Court: Commercial Court
For the purposes of a challenge under section 67 of the Arbitration Act 1996, treaty requirements forming part of the substantive protection afforded by an…
2
27 Mar 2024
[2024] EWHC 708 (Comm) · High Court: Commercial Court
On an application to amend an arbitration challenge, the merits threshold is whether the proposed ground has a real prospect of success. A new ground of…
1
8 Mar 2024
[2024] EWHC 503 (Comm) · High Court: Commercial Court
Under s.73 of the Arbitration Act 1996, a jurisdictional objection must be identified with sufficient substance and maintained before the tribunal. A general…
7
21 Dec 2023
[2023] EWCA Civ 1518 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Only the court which determines a challenge or appeal against an arbitral award at first instance may grant permission to appeal from its decision on security…
2
8 Dec 2023
[2023] EWCA Civ 1471 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Collective proceedings rules do not, by necessary implication, prohibit defendants or their lawyers from communicating directly with class members about the…
3
28 Jul 2023
[2023] EWHC 1942 (Comm) · High Court: Commercial Court
A state which agrees to LCIA arbitration engages the supervisory and ancillary jurisdiction conferred on the English court by the Arbitration Act 1996. A…
10 Jul 2023
[2023] EWHC 2448 (Comm) · High Court: Commercial Court
When assessing costs summarily after related applications, the court may adopt a broad-brush approach rather than undertake a detailed assessment. The court…

Earlier names

These figures include judgments naming firms that have since merged into, or been renamed as, Arnold & Porter: Kaye Scholer LLP.

Based on judgments published by The National Archives (Find Case Law) in which Arnold & Porter is named as solicitors, counted under the firm's current name. The figures are minimums: not every judgment names the solicitors, and a judgment is counted only when we are confident who acted. The selection of cases listed here is limited, and does not include family, criminal or anonymised cases. Firm details include data from the Solicitors Regulation Authority. zoomLaw is independent and not connected with Arnold & Porter. Something wrong or missing? Tell us. All law firms.