From pre-nups to Star Wars helmets, Suzanna Ring and Alex Novarese look at some of the significant cases to have been settled at The Supreme Court

December 2009 – R v The Governing Body of JFS

This concerned an alleged discrimination. A Jewish faith school had refused admittance to a boy because his mother's conversion to Judaism did not satisfy their criteria for him to be considered of matrilineal descent. The Court backed the appellant against the school in a five to four ruling.

June 2010 – Secretary of State for the Home Department v AP

The case involved a control order against an Ethiopian national suspected of involvement in terrorism, which confined him to a flat for 16 hours a day in a Midlands town away from his family in London. The appeal was against the move to the Midlands. The Supreme Court allowed this appeal, with the judgment of general importance for setting the parameters around control orders.

October 2010 – Radmacher v Granatino

The case saw the Court back the enforceability of prenuptial agreements for the first time in a landmark ruling. Nicolas Granatino claimed he had no idea of the fortune of his wife – German heiress Katrin Radmacher – and that he had not been properly advised by a lawyer when the pre-nup was drawn up. Radmacher won in an eight to one judgment with Lady Hale dissenting.

October 2010 – Cadder v Her Majesty's Advocate (Scotland)

The question in the appeal was whether a person who has been detained by police in Scotland on suspicion of having committed an offence has the right of access to a lawyer before the interview. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to the High Court of Justiciary, provoking outrage among some Scottish politicians at interference in criminal justice.

November 2010 – R v Chaytor and others

The Supreme Court rejected an appeal by former Labour MPs David Chaytor, Elliot Morley and Jim Devine that their cases over Parliamentary expenses fraud should be heard by Parliament, not the courts. A high profile ruling amid the expenses scandal, which involved key constitutional matters of Parliamentary privilege and interpretation of the Bill of Rights.

March 2011 – Jones v Kaney

Following a road traffic accident, appellant Paul Jones lost out on damages due to advice given by expert psychologist Dr Sue Kaney. The Supreme Court upheld Jones's appeal, resulting in expert witnesses losing their long-standing blanket immunity from being sued for negligence.

July 2011 – Jivraj v Hashwani

A key ruling for the international arbitration community, the Court found that arbitrators are not employees and therefore fall outside of UK equality laws. The case concerned a joint venture agreement with an arbitration clause requiring any dispute to be resolved by arbitrators from the (Muslim) Ismaili community. This was challenged by Hashwani, who tried to appoint a UK judge. However, the Court upheld the clause.

July 2011 – Lucasfilm v Ainsworth and another

A battle between George Lucas's movie empire and a UK prop designer over the sale of the iconic Stormtrooper helmets (pictured, top) from the Star Wars films attracted many headlines. The Court held that while Lucasfilm can enforce a US copyright in the UK, the Stormtrooper helmets sold were functional, rather than works of art, and therefore the defendant did not breach copyright laws. Notable for its importance in copyright law and the high profile appellant. There was much amusement over the Court's mistaken belief that Star Wars was set in the future, not the past.

November 2011 – Jones v Kernott

The Supreme Court backed the court's rights to decide a 'fair' split of assets for separating cohabiting couples. The case involved an unmarried couple where the woman had contributed much more to the mortgage and house maintenance. The county court had ruled she should receive 90% of the value of the property, a decision supported by the Supreme Court.

May 2012 – Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority

The Supreme Court dismissed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's appeal against extradition to Sweden to face the alleged offences of sexual molestation and rape. The verdict was a majority of five to two, with Lady Hale and Lord Mance dissenting.

July 2012 – Alvi v Secretary of State for the Home Department

A hugely significant case for immigration law. Hussain Zulfiquar Alvi – a Pakistani citizen – worked in the UK under a permit from 2005 to 2009. When he tried to renew the permit, the system had changed to become points-based and he was refused because his job and salary did not meet the levels of the skilled occupations required by the rules. The court unanimously dismissed the Secretary of State's appeal because there were discrepancies between the Immigration Rules and the 1971 Immigration Act, and it is the Act that must be adhered to.