header-logo header-logo

Protective costs orders

21 October 2010 / Deirdre Lyons , Colleen Theron
Issue: 7438 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

PCOs are not a green light for environmental challenges. Deirdre Lyons & Colleen Theron explain why

Protective costs orders (PCOs) are intended to promote access to justice. They are often sought in judicial review applications containing a public interest element where claimants with limited resources are pursuing a claim that may benefit others.

R (Corner House) v SoS for Trade and Industry [2005] 4 All ER 1 stated that PCOs should only be made in exceptional circumstances, where: 

  • the issues raised are of public importance;
  • the public interest requires that those issues should be resolved;
  • the applicant has no private interest in the outcome of the case;
  • having regard to the financial resources of the applicant, the respondent(s) and to the amount of costs that are likely to be involved it is fair and just to make the order;
  • if the order is not made, the applicant will probably discontinue the proceedings and will be acting reasonably in doing so.

In R (Garner) v Elmbridge Borough Council [2010] EWCA

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
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
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll