Corner House Research, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Trade & Industry [2005] EWCA Civ 192 (01 March 2005)

Corner House Research, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Trade & Industry [2005] EWCA Civ 192 (01 March 2005)

The Court of Appeal held that a protective costs order should be granted in judicial review proceedings where the issues are of general public importance, the applicant has limited means, and access to justice would otherwise be impeded. The court clarified and endorsed the criteria for granting PCOs, emphasizing the need for a cost-capping element and the importance of facilitating public interest litigation.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 192
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Corner House Research; Defendant/respondent: Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Intervener: Public Law Project
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal From Refusal of Protective Costs Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Protective Costs Orders, Costs in Judicial Review, Access to Justice
Civil Procedure Public Law Protective Costs Orders Costs in Judicial Review Access to Justice

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Corner House Research

Claimant/appellant

Secretary of State for Trade and Industry

Defendant/respondent

Public Law Project

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal From Refusal of Protective Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant a protective costs order (PCO) in judicial review proceedings raising issues of general public importance
  2. 2 What principles govern the grant of PCOs in public law cases

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that a protective costs order should be granted in judicial review proceedings where the issues are of general public importance, the applicant has limited means, and access to justice would otherwise be impeded. The court clarified and endorsed the criteria for granting PCOs, emphasizing the need for a cost-capping element and the importance of facilitating public interest litigation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Protective costs order made in favour of the claimants, including a cost-capping element as per King v Telegraph Group Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 613