I am grateful for that intervention, which in fact underlines the point. The fact is that it is impossible. No one could draft a set of principles or rules that would accurately dictate in advance how the judicial discretion in this matter would be exercised in all possible circumstances. All that one can do is to give indications. That is what we sought to do in Hamilton and it is what the courts will do on a case-by-case basis when this question arises. You cannot categorically set out all the various circumstances. Costs are always a difficult matter. They are left to judicial discretion, and that is how it has worked down the generations. No one has ever previously tried to prescribe that the courts must in certain circumstances—or must not, in other highly specific circumstances—order costs. The real problem with this provision is that it will be used to limit access to judicial review to those who have substantial independent means. It will be used effectively to deter others from pursuing litigation because they will feel that they are at risk of endangering their supporting family or other properly supporting bodies.
Criminal Justice and Courts Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 30 July 2014.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Criminal Justice and Courts Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
755 c1604 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2014-08-01 15:44:15 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-30/14073046000108
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-30/14073046000108
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-07-30/14073046000108