Lewin, R (On the Application Of) v The Financial Reporting Council Ltd & Ors (Costs)

Lewin, R (On the Application Of) v The Financial Reporting Council Ltd & Ors (Costs)

The claimant achieved partial success on the issue of the Tribunal's fairness, justifying an apportionment of costs. The claimant is to pay two-thirds of the first and second defendants' costs, reflecting his failure on the main relief sought. The interested parties are not entitled to a separate order for costs as their interests and arguments were sufficiently represented by the defendants and there was no conflict requiring separate representation.

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 After Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Claimant to pay two-thirds of the first and second defendants' costs; no order as to costs between claimant and interested parties.
Legal Topics
Costs, Judicial Review, Tribunal Fairness, Public Law Remedies
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Costs Judicial Review Tribunal Fairness Public Law Remedies

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

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 After Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the general rule on costs should be departed from in light of partial success by the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the interested parties are entitled to a separate order for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant achieved partial success on the issue of the Tribunal's fairness, justifying an apportionment of costs. The claimant is to pay two-thirds of the first and second defendants' costs, reflecting his failure on the main relief sought. The interested parties are not entitled to a separate order for costs as their interests and arguments were sufficiently represented by the defendants and there was no conflict requiring separate representation.

Court Disposition

Claimant to pay two-thirds of the first and second defendants' costs; no order as to costs between claimant and interested parties.

Orders

  • Claimant to pay two-thirds of the costs of the first and second defendants on a standard basis, subject to detailed assessment.
  • No order as to costs between the claimant and the interested parties.