The Court dismissed a self-represented applicant's application for a protective costs order in Class 4 judicial review proceedings challenging a Part 5 EPA Act determination for social housing. Applying the three-step Caroona No 3 framework, Pritchard J accepted at a general level that the proceedings were brought in the public interest but found no 'something more' — the case raised no novel issues of general importance, would not materially contribute to the development of the law, did not concern an environmental component of significant value, and affected only a small section of the public. Countervailing circumstances including the applicant's private interest in property values and the narrowness of the statutory interpretation point, combined with the significant competing public interest in social housing delivery, weighed against departure from the usual costs rule.
The full text is available to signed-in members.