Why is Rakusen v Jepsen cited in that order?
<p><a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2021-0188.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><em>Rakusen v Jepsen</em></a> is a high profile Rent Repayment Order (RRO) application case, in which the Applicant’s name typically comes before that of the respondent when the case is referred to. In this one, Rakusen is the name of the landlord (ie respondent party), yet their name seems invariably to be cited in front. Why is this?</p>

<p><a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/2021/1150.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Rakusen was the appellant at the Court of Appeal</a>. Many, but not all, appellate courts adopt the norm of listing the appellant as the first party in the style of cause, even if they were the respondent or defendant in the underlying matter.</p>
<p>This style decision can vary between courts within the same country and can even differ between courts within the same appeal hierarchy. E.g. in Canada different provinces do it different ways, and not all of them match the Supreme Court's style.</p>

england-and-wales landlord legal-citation