Law firm

Scott-Moncrieff & Associates Ltd

Scott-Moncrieff & Associates Ltd is named as solicitors in at least 74 UK judgments from 2006 to 2026, most often in public and administrative law and civil liberties and human rights.

74
judgments
21
in the last five years
4
in the Supreme Court or Privy Council
25
in the Court of Appeal

Practice areas

  • Public and administrative law48
  • Civil liberties and human rights15
  • Immigration and asylum12
  • Social welfare and education7
  • Family and children4
  • Crime4
  • Court of Protection and mental health3
  • Commercial disputes2

Courts

  • Supreme Court4
  • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)23
  • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)2
  • High Court40
  • Employment Appeal Tribunal1
  • Upper Tribunal4

Counsel most often instructed

  • Adam Tear9
  • Stephen Broach6
  • Ian Wise5
  • Hugh Southey4
  • Ashley Underwood3
  • Joshua Dubin3
  • Shu Shin Luh3

Judgments by year

  • 20264
  • 20253
  • 20242
  • 20234
  • 20228
  • 20217
  • 20209
  • 20192
  • 20180
  • 20172
  • 20162
  • 20157
  • 20144
  • 201311
  • 20125
  • 20113
  • 20100
  • 20090
  • 20080
  • 20070

Cases later courts cite most

Cases Scott-Moncrieff & Associates Ltd acted in that later judgments cite most often.

Date Case Cited by
8 Jul 2015
[2015] UKSC 47 · Supreme Court
A social-security benefit falling within the ambit of a Convention right must be administered without discrimination under article 14, although the Convention…
57
5 Apr 2022
[2022] EWCA Civ 457 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
The intensity of the public sector equality duty is sensitive to the function, facts and stage of decision-making. An early, genuinely experimental decision…
13
12 Dec 2014
[2014] EWHC 4216 (QB) · High Court: Queen's Bench Division
In assessing future needs arising from chronic pain, the court must examine the claimant’s individual circumstances and the evidence as it stands. The ending…
9
19 Dec 2011
[2011] EWHC 3379 (QB) · High Court: Queen's Bench Division
In assessing whether prison conditions constitute degrading treatment under Article 3, the court must consider all the circumstances and their combined…
7
9 Nov 2012
[2012] EWHC 3139 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
A Parole Board recommendation to transfer a life prisoner to open conditions is not binding on the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State must consider the…
7
21 Jan 2012
[2012] EWHC 809 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
Suitability for release and suitability for transfer to open prison conditions involve different legal tests. Release requires a threshold assessment of…
5

Recent cases

Date Case Cited by
20 May 2026
[2026] EWHC 1213 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
Permission to bring judicial review proceedings requires an arguable public law flaw in the decision-making process. The court must not substitute its own…
29 Aug 2025
[2025] EWHC 2248 (KB) · High Court: King's Bench Division
On a standard-basis costs assessment, the court must allow costs that are proportionate to the matters in issue and reasonably incurred and reasonable in…
4 Aug 2025
[2025] EWHC 2070 (KB) · High Court: King's Bench Division
The indemnity principle applies where criminal legal aid funds civil contempt proceedings. A legally aided party cannot recover more from the paying party than…
18 Jul 2024
[2024] EWHC 1869 (SCCO) · High Court: Senior Courts Costs Office
In criminal legal-aid proceedings, the indemnity principle remains applicable unless legislation expressly disapplies it. Civil contempt proceedings are…
21 Dec 2023
[2023] EWCA Civ 1527 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
An Article 14 challenge to eligibility rules for criminal-injuries compensation requires consideration of analogous situations, status, legitimate aim and…
1
23 Jun 2023
[2023] EWCA Civ 720 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Detention following lawful revocation of a licence and recall to prison is not arbitrary merely because administrative delay, inaccurate reassurance or failure…
25 Aug 2022
[2022] EWHC 2270 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
Section 20(1) of the Children Act 1989 imposes a duty, not merely a power, to accommodate a child in need where the statutory conditions appear to the local…
5 Apr 2022
[2022] EWCA Civ 457 · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
The intensity of the public sector equality duty is sensitive to the function, facts and stage of decision-making. An early, genuinely experimental decision…
13
30 Mar 2022
[2022] EWHC 722 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
Detention following recall to prison remains within Article 5(1)(a) where it results from, follows and depends upon an unexpired determinate sentence imposed…
15 Apr 2021
[2021] EWHC 935 (Comm) · High Court: Commercial Court
A prior refusal to discharge or vary orders generally requires a material change of circumstances before the application can be renewed. Bankruptcy alone may…
15 Feb 2021
[2021] EWHC 250 (QB) · High Court: Queen's Bench Division
On an application to strike out a negligence claim against a local authority, the court must ask whether the claim is bound to fail. A claim should not…
1
14 Aug 2020
[2020] EWHC 2216 (Admin) · High Court: Administrative Court
The Secretary of State’s emergency modification of statutory duties concerning special educational provision was lawful. A common law duty to consult did not…
1

Earlier names

These figures include judgments naming firms that have since merged into, or been renamed as, Scott-Moncrieff & Associates Ltd: Scott-Moncrieff, Solicitors.

Based on judgments published by The National Archives (Find Case Law) in which Scott-Moncrieff & Associates Ltd 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 Scott-Moncrieff & Associates Ltd. Something wrong or missing? Tell us. All law firms.