Practice areas
Courts
Counsel most often instructed
Judgments by year
Cases later courts cite most
Cases Hodge Jones & Allen acted in that later judgments cite most often.
| Date | Case | Cited by |
|---|---|---|
| 9 Jul 2008 |
[2008] EWCA Civ 755 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Public authorities ordinarily retain power to change policy. An unequivocal promise or established practice of consultation will generally require consultation…
|
91 |
| 9 Jun 2017 |
[2017] EWCA Civ 427 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Under the former consultation regime, development was likely to affect the site of a scheduled monument only if it would physically affect the monument or land…
|
24 |
| 15 Feb 2007 |
[2007] EWHC 311 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
A public authority which promises consultation must honour that promise unless it has good reason to depart from it. Consultation must be fair in the…
|
21 |
| 10 Nov 2017 |
[2017] EWHC 2823 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
When a planning application is amended, the substantive question whether the amended development remains substantially the development originally proposed is…
|
20 |
| 11 May 2006 |
[2006] EWHC 1032 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
On an extradition appeal, fresh evidence unavailable at the magistrates’ hearing may be admitted without satisfying the strict requirements in Ladd v Marshall…
|
16 |
| 20 Jan 2011 |
[2011] EWCA Civ 8 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
A possession hearing conducted in a tenant’s absence is not a trial for the purposes of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court may therefore set aside the…
|
15 |
| 1 Apr 2014 |
[2014] EWHC 957 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
In a Part II extradition appeal, the High Court determines for itself whether the admissible evidence establishes a prima facie case. Hearsay admitted under…
|
15 |
| 12 Feb 2016 |
[2016] EWHC 255 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
Applications for property freezing orders and disclosure orders may be determined without notice and on paper where that procedure is justified; the absence of…
|
14 |
| 15 Mar 2013 |
[2013] EWHC 481 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
A high-level governmental decision to promote a major infrastructure project is not necessarily a plan or programme requiring strategic environmental…
|
11 |
| 27 Jan 2017 |
[2017] EWHC 84 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
A local authority may validly restrict mooring on its land to prevent obstruction of public access to a river and its banks. The practical effect on boat…
|
8 |
Recent cases
| Date | Case | Cited by |
|---|---|---|
| 28 Sep 2026 |
[2026] EWCA Civ 1219 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Under Extradition Act 2003, section 179 requires the Secretary of State to choose priority between competing extradition claims by reference to matters…
|
|
| 14 Jul 2026 |
[2026] EWHC 1765 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
On judicial review of a refusal to transfer a life prisoner to open conditions, the Secretary of State remains the decision-maker and may disagree with the…
|
|
| 24 Apr 2026 |
[2026] EWHC 956 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
Under Part 2 of the Extradition Act 2003, the court may proceed only on the extradition request certified by the Secretary of State. Further information may…
|
|
| 15 Jan 2026 |
[2026] EWHC 63 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
For a conviction warrant under the Extradition Act 2003, the statutory requirement is to provide particulars of the conviction and sentence. The warrant need…
|
|
| 11 Nov 2025 |
[2025] EWHC 2942 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
On an appeal under section 27(3) of the Extradition Act 2003, the appellate court may intervene where the overall Article 8 evaluation was wrong because…
|
|
| 29 Oct 2025 |
[2025] EWHC 2795 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
In extradition cases involving a Council of Europe state, there is a strong presumption that the requested person will be treated in accordance with article 3…
|
1 |
| 27 Oct 2025 |
[2025] EWCA Civ 1355 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
An out-of-district homelessness placement may be lawful where accommodation in the authority’s district is not reasonably practicable, including because of a…
|
|
| 11 Sep 2025 |
[2025] EWHC 2293 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
When deciding which of competing extradition claims should take precedence under section 179 of the Extradition Act 2003, the Secretary of State must act…
|
|
| 29 Jul 2025 |
[2025] EWHC 1980 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
In extradition cases, interference with private life under article 8 ECHR will rarely outweigh the strong public interest in surrender, particularly where the…
|
|
| 30 Jun 2025 |
[2025] EWHC 1637 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
An Article 2 investigative obligation does not prescribe a single procedure. The obligation may be discharged by several investigations considered…
|
|
| 3 Apr 2025 |
[2025] EWHC 781 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
Article 2 applies automatically only where the circumstances fall within a category that necessarily gives rise, in every case, to a legitimate suspicion of…
|
1 |
| 5 Mar 2025 |
[2025] EWHC 462 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
An offer of accommodation as temporary accommodation, expressly made without a secure or introductory tenancy, is not an “allocation” under Part VI of the…
|
1 |
Earlier names
These figures include judgments naming firms that have since merged into, or been renamed as, Hodge Jones & Allen: Harrison Grant.
Based on judgments published by The National Archives (Find Case Law) in which Hodge Jones & Allen 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 Hodge Jones & Allen. Something wrong or missing? Tell us. All law firms.