header-logo header-logo

Ongoing protection?

08 October 2009 / Julia Marlow , Charles Brasted
Issue: 7388 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Charles Brasted & Julia Marlow review protective costs orders in judicial review

The perennial issue of the cost of litigation and its impact on access to justice is under the spotlight again in Lord Justice Jackson’s ongoing Civil Litigation Costs Review (the Jackson Review).

Nowhere is the issue of more acute importance than in the area of judicial review, where litigation is not simply a matter of determining the private rights of parties but an essential constitutional element of ensuring fair and lawful governance.

The availability of protective costs orders (PCOs) in judicial review proceedings has, since first considered in R v Lord Chancellor ex p Child Poverty Action Group [1999] 1 WLR (CPAG), become an important part of the judiciary’s response to such concerns. As PCOs have become more prevalent, so has the caselaw become more extensive and the governing principles more developed.

The recent case of Morgan & Ors v Hinton Organics (Wessex) Ltd [2009] EWCA 107 Civ provides a

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll