Shanks, R (on the application of) v North Tyneside Council

On settlement of an administrative law claim, the court may still determine costs by assessing the practical outcome and the parties’ conduct. Where a consent declaration substantially gives the claimant the clarification sought, and earlier reconsideration by the defendant could have avoided costs, it may be appropriate to order the defendant to pay the claimant’s costs. The court may make the declaration by consent without determining the underlying legal issue. Costs of related magistrates’ proceedings may be left where they fall.

The claimant challenged North Tyneside Council’s licensing position concerning the use of Hackney Carriages for private hiring by a private hire vehicle operator. Before the substantive hearing, the parties reached terms of agreement. The court was asked to make the agreed declaration and determine the costs of the judicial review proceedings, while the parties agreed that costs in the magistrates’ proceedings should lie where they fell.

1. The court made, by consent, the declaration that a private hire vehicle operator is not precluded from using Hackney Carriages for a private hiring. The declaration clarified or amended the licensing conditions imposed by the defendant.
2. Although the substantive dispute had settled, the court exercised its discretion on costs. The declaration essentially gave the claimants the clarification they had sought, so they were properly regarded as having achieved the substance of their objective.
3. The defendant’s decision to settle was sensible and should not generally be discouraged. Nevertheless, the issue was purely legal, the claimants’ position had been clear, and costs might have been saved if the defendant had reconsidered its position earlier.
4. The defendant was ordered to pay the claimant’s costs of the proceedings, subject to detailed assessment. There was no order as to the costs of the magistrates’ proceedings.