We Love Hackney Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Hackney

We Love Hackney Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Hackney

The proceedings are not public interest proceedings as defined by statute, the claimant's backers have sufficient resources, and it would not be reasonable for the claimant to withdraw the claim for lack of a costs capping order; therefore, the application for a costs capping order is dismissed. Security for costs...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: We Love Hackney Limited; Defendant: London Borough of Hackney
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Ruling on Costs Capping Order and Security for Costs Applications
Outcome
Claimant's application for costs capping order dismissed; Defendant's application for security for costs allowed in part.
Legal Topics
Costs Capping Orders, Security for Costs, Public Sector Equality Duty, Licensing Policy, Judicial Review Procedure
Administrative Law Licensing Law Costs Capping Orders Security for Costs Public Sector Equality Duty Licensing Policy Judicial Review Procedure

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

We Love Hackney Limited

Claimant

London Borough of Hackney

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Ruling on Costs Capping Order and Security for Costs Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings are public interest proceedings under section 88 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015
  2. 2 Whether a costs capping order should be granted
  3. 3 Whether security for costs should be ordered

Ratio Decidendi

The proceedings are not public interest proceedings as defined by statute, the claimant's backers have sufficient resources, and it would not be reasonable for the claimant to withdraw the claim for lack of a costs capping order; therefore, the application for a costs capping order is dismissed. Security for costs is just and reasonable given the claimant's inability to pay and the risk to the defendant, but the amount is reduced to £60,000.

Court Disposition

Claimant's application for costs capping order dismissed; Defendant's application for security for costs allowed in part.

Orders

  • Claimant's application for a costs capping order is dismissed.
  • Defendant's application for security for costs is allowed in the sum of £60,000.