The Supreme Court will next week (30 July) hand down its ruling in a dispute over whether a claimant in statutory and judicial review cases who is unsuccessful at the permission stage should be liable for the costs of multiple other parties, including respondents and interested parties.
In CPRE (Kent) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Respondent) – UKSC 2019/0174 the Appellant (the Kent branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England) applied for judicial review against the Respondents and Interested Party. Permission for judicial review was refused.
The judge held this was a claim to which the cap on costs under the Aarhus Convention applied. She ordered that the Appellant pay both Respondents’ and the Interested Party’s costs up to that cap, totalling £10,000.
The Appellant challenged this order. In Campaign to Protect Rural England & Anor v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors  EWCA Civ 1230 the Court of Appeal dismissed that challenge.
A Supreme Court panel comprising Lord Reed, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Leggatt and Lord Burrows heard the case on 28 January 2021.