Bullmore, R (on the application of) v West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust

Bullmore, R (on the application of) v West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust

The judge did not misdirect himself or misapply the test for granting a protective costs order; the issues raised were not of sufficient general public importance to justify a protective costs order, and the judge's exercise of discretion was within the permissible range.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: The Queen on the Application of Bullmore; Defendant/respondent: West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Permission to Appeal Refusal of Protective Costs Order
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Protective Costs Orders, Judicial Review, Public Interest Litigation
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Protective Costs Orders Judicial Review Public Interest Litigation

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen on the Application of Bullmore

Claimant/appellant

West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Permission to Appeal Refusal of Protective Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in refusing a protective costs order for the claimants in judicial review proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the issues raised were of sufficient general public importance to justify a protective costs order
  3. 3 Whether the judge misapplied the test for granting a protective costs order as set out in Corner House

Ratio Decidendi

The judge did not misdirect himself or misapply the test for granting a protective costs order; the issues raised were not of sufficient general public importance to justify a protective costs order, and the judge's exercise of discretion was within the permissible range.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refusal of protective costs order is denied