How many times has [2019] 2 WLR 636 been cited?

[2019] 2 WLR 636 is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2019] 2 WLR 636

· 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

[2019] 2 WLR 636

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

Cited · 2

Cited — Latayan v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2020-02-20
“…e was no evidence to support the challenged finding of fact, or that the finding was one that no reasonable judge could have reached: Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] 2 WLR 636, [2019] UKSC 5 at [52], summarising much previous authority. That cannot be said in this case. The Appellant simply did not produce documentary or oral evidenc…”
Cited — Staechelin & Ors v ACLBDD Holdings Ltd & Ors 2019-05-14
“…More recently, in Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] UKSC 5, [2019] 2 WLR 636 the Supreme Court summarised the constraints on interfering with findings of fact at [52]:…”