or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court, in planning and development judicial review proceedings, makes order directing unsuccessful applicant to pay the legal costs of the successful local authority in accordance with the normal rule as to legal costs, on the grounds that the special legislative rules applying to costs in planning and development judicial review proceedings do not apply on a quia timet basis in circumstances where the substantive, unsuccessful judicial review proceedings were premature because a 'decision' had not been made which was reviewable by the court.
Judicial review - planning and development - costs - jurisdictional basis upon which costs should be awarded - two pending planning applications - planning and development legislative regime - strategic environmental assessment directive - qualifying criteria for costs protection - parties have unrestricted right of appeal against any costs order made - jurisdiction - ordinary and natural meaning of legislative provision on costs in such planning judicial reviews - Aarhus convention - substantive application for review was premature - Order 99 RSC - no special reasons advanced as to why unsuccessful party should not be liable for legal costs.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.