Smoke Club Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd [2013] EWHC 3830 (Admin) (29 October 2013)

Smoke Club Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd [2013] EWHC 3830 (Admin) (29 October 2013)

The specific costs rules for judicial review as set out in Mount Cook override the general CPR 38.6 rule on discontinuance; however, where new material is introduced requiring further response, or where grounds are hopeless and persisted in, costs may extend beyond acknowledgment of service to a proportion of subsequent costs.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3830 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Smoke Club Limited; Defendant: Network Rail Infrastructure Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Costs Determination Following Notice of Discontinuance After Refusal of Permission on Paper
Outcome
Claimant to pay defendant's costs of acknowledgment of service and one third of subsequent costs, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Costs on Discontinuance, Permission Stage, Compulsory Purchase
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Costs on Discontinuance Permission Stage Compulsory Purchase

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

Parties

Smoke Club Limited

Claimant

Network Rail Infrastructure Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Costs Determination Following Notice of Discontinuance After Refusal of Permission on Paper

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CPR 38.6 general rule on costs on discontinuance overrides Mount Cook principles in judicial review
  2. 2 Whether exceptions to Mount Cook apply due to hopelessness of grounds
  3. 3 Extent of costs recoverable by defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The specific costs rules for judicial review as set out in Mount Cook override the general CPR 38.6 rule on discontinuance; however, where new material is introduced requiring further response, or where grounds are hopeless and persisted in, costs may extend beyond acknowledgment of service to a proportion of subsequent costs.

Court Disposition

Claimant to pay defendant's costs of acknowledgment of service and one third of subsequent costs, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed.

Orders

  • Claimant to pay defendant's costs of acknowledgment of service.
  • Claimant to pay one third of defendant's post-acknowledgment costs.