The Supreme Court dismisses the appellant's appeal, affirming the original decisions of the Circuit Court and High Court, which had awarded costs to the respondent university. The appellant had unsuccessfully sought documentation related to a university course application and challenged the impartiality of a judge due to familial connections with the university. The Supreme Court ruled that no order for costs would be made on this appeal in favor of any party, and the orders for costs made in the lower courts in favor of the respondent university would not be disturbed. The court also addressed and amended certain factual inaccuracies in the judgment as requested by the appellant.
Supreme Court, appellant, respondent university, judicial disqualification, costs award, public interest proceedings, Legal Services Regulation Act 2015, s. 169, Little v Chief Appeals Officer, amicus curiae, Bar Council, Law Society, Judicial Council Act 2019, s. 50(1), documentation request, Circuit Court Rules, Order 57A, rule 6(6), impartiality, familial connections, factual inaccuracies, amendment of judgment.