header-logo header-logo

Judicial review—Costs of application—Protective costs order

20 January 2011
Issue: 7449 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of Edwards and another) v Environment Agency (Cemex UK Cement Ltd, intervening) [2010] UKSC 57, [2010] All ER (D) 183 (Dec)

Supreme Court, Lord Hope DP, Lord Walker, Lord Brown, Lord Mance and Sir John Dyson SCJJ, 15 Dec 2010

It is not open to costs officers, where applications to reduce or cap a party’s liability have been made to, considered and rejected by the court, to achieve that result through the detailed assessment process.

David Wolfe (instructed by Richard Buxton Environmental and Public Law) for the claimant.  James Eadie QC, James Maurici and Charles Banner (instructed by the treasury solicitor) for the secretary of state.

The underlying action concerned an application for judicial review of the Environmental Agency’s decision to issue a permit for the operation of a cement works. Permission had been granted to use shredded tyres as fuel for the works and there had been a public campaign against that decision. The appellant failed before the Court of Appeal and appealed to the House of Lords.

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll