The claimant had been refused leave to bring judicial review. It then renewed its application before finally wthdrawing it. The court now considered liability for costs.
Held: ‘There are particular reasons for the particular rules governing costs at the paper and oral permission stage in judicial review, which are reflected in the decision and principles in Mount Cook. It would be extremely odd if a claimant could save himself the costs liability by proceeding further with judicial review proceedings so that he failed at the oral renewal stage and did not have to pay the costs of the successful defendant, but was liable to pay the costs that might have been incurred after the acknowledgment of service if he served a notice of discontinuance. ‘
Ouseley J
[2013] EWHC 3830 (Admin), [2014] 2 Costs LO 123
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 38.6
England and Wales
Citing:
Preferred – Mount Cook Land Ltd and Another v Westminster City Council CA 14-Oct-2003
The applicants had sought judicial review of the defendant’s grant of planning permission for the redevelopment of the former CandA building in Oxford Street. Though the application for leave to apply had been successful, and a full hearing took . .
Cited – Davey v Aylesbury Vale District Council CA 15-Nov-2007
The court was asked whether, as a matter of law or of practice, an order for costs made in favour of a successful respondent to judicial review proceedings includes costs incurred prior to the grant of permission unless these are expressly excluded. . .
Cited – Ayr Harbour Trustees v Oswald 1883
The appellant trustees could not competently preclude themselves from exercising their powers under the Ayr Harbour Act in respect of certain land acquired by them for the purposes of that statute bearing in mind that their discretionary powers were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Costs, Judicial Review
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.536022