How many times has [2011] EWCA Civ 642 been cited?

[2011] EWCA Civ 642 is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2011] EWCA Civ 642

· 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

[2011] EWCA Civ 642

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

Considered · 1Cited · 1

Considered — Hexpress Healthcare Limited, R (on the application of) v The Care Quality Commission 2023-03-06
“…The fact that the requirements of procedural fairness are variable and case specific also appears from R(Shoesmith) v Ofsted [2011] EWCA Civ 642; [2011] ICR 1195 (“Shoesmith”) at paragraph 34. In Shoesmith the Court of Appeal considered a joint area review carried out by Ofsted within a limited timefram…”
Cited — Balajigari v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2019-04-16
“…amjohn [2011] UKPC 20 (see para. 39 of the judgment of the Board delivered by Lord Brown). A more recent authority to the same effect is R (Shoesmith) v Ofsted [2011] EWCA Civ 642, [2011] ICR 1195: see per Maurice Kay LJ at paras. 69-74 (pp. 1215-7), who emphasises at para. 70 that the test is one of inevitability and that “probability i…”