Redacted documents and costs caps in judicial review (R (Badger Trust) v Natural England)
Environment analysis: The High Court provided guidance on redacting documents and varying Aarhus costs caps pursuant to CPR 46.27. As to redaction, the High Court held that once proceedings are commenced, documents within court papers which have been redacted must be considered by the redacting party. The court needs assistance as to how to respect the open justice principle and protect any relevant interest, which may be through a pre-action letter, a witness statement, or an application. As to cost caps, the caps in CPR 46.26 are ‘in the nature of a soft presumption’. In deciding whether to allow variation, the central focus is on prohibitive expensiveness of proceedings. There are two alternative routes. Limb (a) is concerned with ‘real word unaffordability’. Limb (b) is where likely costs are objectively unreasonable, having regard to the six factors in CPR 46.27(3)(b). Written by Hannah Taylor, barrister at Cornerstone Barristers.