In public interest environmental litigation brought under open standing provisions, the public interest nature of the proceedings is directly relevant to the propriety of a maximum costs order under UCPR r 42.4, and the operation of LEC Rules r 4.2 qualifies the respondent's expectation of recovering costs if successful. The lack of proportionality between a capped costs amount and the likely costs of the proceedings does not, of itself, vitiate a maximum costs order where the order is necessary to ensure access to justice in public interest litigation. The majority and dissent disagreed on whether proportionality between the capped amount and estimated costs is a mandatory consideration.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 29 later cases that cite this judgment.
8 of the 29 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.