How many times has [1999] 1 WLR 1465 been cited?

[1999] 1 WLR 1465 is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[1999] 1 WLR 1465

· cited by 2 · influence score 13/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

[1999] 1 WLR 1465

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Cited · 2

Cited — The Motherhood Plan (R on the application of) v HM Treasury 2021-11-24
“…o prima facie indirect discrimination. Her reasoning was based in part on three decisions relied on by the Respondent – Barry v Midland Bank plc [1999] UKHL 38,[1999] 1 WLR 1465, Trustees of Uppingham School Retirement Benefits Scheme v Shillcock [2002] EWHC 641 (Ch), [2002] IRLR 702, and R (Adiatu) v HM Treasury [2020] EWHC 1554 (Admi…”
Cited — McNeil & Ors v Revenue And Customs 2019-07-03
“…sition by referring to a number of authorities – specifically Seymour-Smith (at paras. 59-60 of the judgment of the Court (p. 597 FH)), Barry v Midland Bank plc[1999] 1 WLR 1465, per Lord Nicholls at p. 1474 EH), Home Office v Bailey (per Peter Gibson LJ at paras. 29-31 (pp.1069-70)) and Essop (per Lady Hale at paras. 23-25 and 27-29 (…”