Fernie, R (on the application of) v Lincolnshire Police

Judicial review proceedings which have become wholly academic should ordinarily be dismissed without determining disputed legal issues that no longer have practical consequences. This is especially so where the underlying dispute has been resolved and the court has not heard full argument from all interested parties. The court retains discretion to make a limited costs order where the claimant had a strongly arguable case and incurred reasonable costs in bringing the matter before the court.

The claimant sought judicial review in connection with proceedings before the magistrates concerning documents held by the Chief Constable of Lincolnshire Police. The magistrates had refused an adjournment when the claimant was absent, and the claimant also challenged the police’s continued retention of the documents. Before the judicial review was determined, the claimant was released on parole and the police agreed to return the documents. The underlying dispute therefore ceased to have practical significance. The court had to decide whether to determine the arguable procedural and statutory issues or dismiss the proceedings as academic, and how to deal with costs.

1. Proceedings dismissed. The claimant’s documents were to be returned, so the judicial review had become wholly academic. It would have been wrong to determine the disputed issues in those circumstances.
2. There was a strong argument that the magistrates had been too ready to refuse an adjournment when the claimant failed to attend. The issue concerning whether a further telephone call should have been made, particularly in light of the disputed account of the claimant’s opportunity to attend under escort, was not decided because the respondent parties had not had the opportunity to argue it fully.
3. The court also declined to determine the potentially important issue concerning the Chief Constable’s right to retain the documents, including the asserted relationship between the applicable code and the statute. That issue was academic in the circumstances.
4. Although the proceedings were dismissed, the claimant had advanced a strongly arguable case and had incurred costs, including costs associated with preparing for and attending the hearing. The respondents were therefore ordered to pay £100 towards his costs.

Not stated in the judgment.