Scorthorne, R (on the application of) v Peterborough County Court

Scorthorne, R (on the application of) v Peterborough County Court

Permission for judicial review is refused because the claim has become academic, there is sufficient High Court authority on the issue, and no exceptional public interest justifies proceeding; CPR 32.13 confers an automatic right of inspection during trial, but the Deputy District Judge erred in requiring a formal application and failing to consider alternatives; however, a declaration would serve no practical purpose.

Parties
Claimant: SCORTHORNE; Defendant: Peterborough County Court
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 July 2026
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Permission Application (orally Renewed)
Outcome
Permission for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Open Justice, Inspection of Witness Statements, Judicial Review, Court Procedure
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Open Justice Inspection of Witness Statements Judicial Review Court Procedure

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SCORTHORNE

Claimant

Peterborough County Court

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Permission Application (orally Renewed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether CPR 32.13 confers an automatic right of inspection of witness statements during trial without formal application
  2. 2 Whether the Deputy District Judge erred in requiring a formal application for inspection
  3. 3 Whether the refusal to allow inspection was a lawful derogation from open justice

Ratio Decidendi

Permission for judicial review is refused because the claim has become academic, there is sufficient High Court authority on the issue, and no exceptional public interest justifies proceeding; CPR 32.13 confers an automatic right of inspection during trial, but the Deputy District Judge erred in requiring a formal application and failing to consider alternatives; however, a declaration would serve no practical purpose.

Court Disposition

Permission for judicial review refused