Lewin, R (On the Application Of) v The Financial Reporting Council Ltd & Ors (Costs) [2018] EWHC 554 (Admin) (19 March 2018)
The claimant achieved partial success on the issue of the Tribunal's breach of fairness, justifying an apportionment of costs. The claimant is to pay two-thirds of the first and second defendants' costs, reflecting his success on one of three main issues. The interested parties are not entitled to a separate costs order as their interests, while separate, did not require distinct representation or arguments beyond those advanced by the defendants.
- Citation
- [2018] EWHC 554 (Admin)
- Parties
- Claimant: Paul Rupert Lewin; First Defendant: The Financial Reporting Council Limited; Second Defendant: The Conduct Committee of the Financial Reporting Council Limited; Third Defendant: The Disciplinary Tribunal (Convened under the FRC's Accountancy Scheme) in the matter of the Executive Counsel of the FRC and (1) Deloitte LLP and (2) John Clennett; Interested Party: Deloitte LLP; Interested Party: John Clennett
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 19 March 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Costs Determination Following Substantive Judgment
- Outcome
- Claimant to pay two-thirds of the first and second defendants' costs on a standard basis, subject to detailed assessment. No order as to costs between the claimant and the interested parties.
- Legal Topics
- Costs, Judicial Review, Public Law, Tribunal Fairness
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Paul Rupert Lewin
Claimant
The Financial Reporting Council Limited
First Defendant
The Conduct Committee of the Financial Reporting Council Limited
Second Defendant
The Disciplinary Tribunal (Convened under the FRC's Accountancy Scheme) in the matter of the Executive Counsel of the FRC and (1) Deloitte LLP and (2) John Clennett
Third Defendant
Deloitte LLP
Interested Party
John Clennett
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Costs Determination Following Substantive Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the general rule on costs should be departed from given partial success by the claimant
- 2 Whether interested parties are entitled to a separate order for costs
Ratio Decidendi
The claimant achieved partial success on the issue of the Tribunal's breach of fairness, justifying an apportionment of costs. The claimant is to pay two-thirds of the first and second defendants' costs, reflecting his success on one of three main issues. The interested parties are not entitled to a separate costs order as their interests, while separate, did not require distinct representation or arguments beyond those advanced by the defendants.
Court Disposition
Claimant to pay two-thirds of the first and second defendants' costs on a standard basis, subject to detailed assessment. No order as to costs between the claimant and the interested parties.
Orders
- Claimant to pay two-thirds of the first and second defendants' costs on a standard basis, subject to detailed assessment.
- No order as to costs between the claimant and the interested parties.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment