header-logo header-logo

Law digests: 17 October 2025

17 October 2025
Issue: 8135 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Costs

R (Bates) v Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court [2025] EWHC 2532 (Admin)

The Divisional Court ruled on the claimant’s applications for the costs incurred in bringing the judicial review proceedings and for ‘costs thrown away’ in the criminal proceedings in the magistrates’ court. The court determined that the decision in Murphy v Media Protection Services, which established an exceptionality requirement for awarding inter partes costs under s 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981) in criminal judicial review, was wrongly decided and should not be followed. The court held that s 51, SCA 1981 preserved the High Court’s discretion to award costs in judicial review proceedings involving criminal causes or matters without requiring exceptional circumstances. The court found that the interested party had acted improperly and vexatiously in initiating a private prosecution, which justified awarding costs against him in favour of the claimant. It was concluded that the costs of the judicial review should be assessed on a standard basis and the application regarding costs of the magistrates’ court proceedings

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll