Payne v Caerphilly County Borough Council [2004] EWCA Civ 433 (17 March 2004)

Payne v Caerphilly County Borough Council [2004] EWCA Civ 433 (17 March 2004)

The Deputy Judge applied the wrong test by not following the Practice Direction CPR Part 54, paragraph 8.6, and by failing to identify exceptional circumstances justifying a costs order against the claimant. The discretion as to costs must be exercised afresh, and in the absence of exceptional circumstances, no order for costs should be made against the claimant.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 433
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Mr Clive Payne; Defendant/respondent: Caerphilly County Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Appeal Against Order for Costs Following Refusal of Renewed Application for Permission for Judicial Review
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Costs Orders, Practice Direction CPR Part 54, Summary Assessment of Costs
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Costs Orders Practice Direction CPR Part 54 Summary Assessment of Costs

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Clive Payne

Claimant/applicant

Caerphilly County Borough Council

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Appeal Against Order for Costs Following Refusal of Renewed Application for Permission for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Deputy High Court Judge erred in awarding costs against the claimant following refusal of permission for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether the Judge should have applied the Practice Direction CPR Part 54, paragraph 8.6, regarding costs at the permission stage
  3. 3 Whether the Judge should have invited submissions on summary versus detailed assessment of costs

Ratio Decidendi

The Deputy Judge applied the wrong test by not following the Practice Direction CPR Part 54, paragraph 8.6, and by failing to identify exceptional circumstances justifying a costs order against the claimant. The discretion as to costs must be exercised afresh, and in the absence of exceptional circumstances, no order for costs should be made against the claimant.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order for costs made by the Deputy Judge quashed
  • Order for costs of £400 to be paid to the claimant