Ewing v Office of the Deputy Prime Minister & Anor

Ewing v Office of the Deputy Prime Minister & Anor

The court held that Mr Ewing was the real party to the judicial review proceedings and liable for costs of the acknowledgement of service under the Mount Cook principles, regardless of his technical status as a party, because he instigated and controlled the proceedings for his own benefit.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Terence Patrick Ewing; Defendants/respondents: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister & Anr; First Interested Party: Royal British Legion; Second Interested Party: Pegasus Homes; Advocate to the Court: Charles Bourne
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court (costs Order at Permission Stage)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigants, Judicial Review Procedure, Costs Orders, Standing in Judicial Review
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Vexatious Litigants Judicial Review Procedure Costs Orders Standing in Judicial Review

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

Parties

Terence Patrick Ewing

Claimant/appellant

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister & Anr

Defendants/respondents

Royal British Legion

First Interested Party

Pegasus Homes

Second Interested Party

Charles Bourne

Advocate to the Court

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court (costs Order at Permission Stage)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs can be ordered against a vexatious litigant at the permission stage of judicial review where leave under section 42 had not been obtained
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was a 'real party' for costs purposes despite procedural irregularities
  3. 3 Proper approach to costs for acknowledgements of service under CPR 54.8

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Mr Ewing was the real party to the judicial review proceedings and liable for costs of the acknowledgement of service under the Mount Cook principles, regardless of his technical status as a party, because he instigated and controlled the proceedings for his own benefit.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Costs order against Mr Ewing (joint and several with Mr Hammerton) for RBL's costs of acknowledgement of service, to be assessed.