The Court of Appeal has ordered Darren Winters to pay the costs of his unsuccessful appeal concerning a claim for payment of legal expenses under the Legal Aid – Custody Issues Scheme.
In a supplemental judgment delivered on 25 November 2025, Ms Justice Hyland rejected Winters' argument that no costs order should be made against him because his proceedings qualified as public interest litigation.
The substantive appeal had already been dismissed on 20 October 2025. In that judgment, the Court of Appeal upheld a decision rejecting Winters' application for payment of legal costs under the scheme. The court concluded that his proceedings were out of time, although it also considered the interpretation of the scheme and described the issue as a somewhat novel point that could arise again.
Winters relied on the Supreme Court decision in Little v Chief Appeals Officer, which recognises that an unsuccessful party in certain public interest proceedings may, in appropriate circumstances, avoid the usual costs consequences. He argued that the interpretation of the Legal Aid scheme had wider significance for future applications.
The court did not accept that this met the required threshold.
Ms Justice Hyland said the substantive argument advanced by Winters had been a relatively weak one and sought an unlikely interpretation that would have significantly extended the scheme's scope. Although the court considered it useful to clarify the point because it might arise again, it was not likely to affect a large number of applicants and did not qualify as a point of general public importance.
The Legal Aid Board and the other respondents had been entirely successful in defending the appeal. The court therefore applied the usual costs rule and ordered that Winters pay their appeal costs, with the amount to be adjudicated if the parties cannot agree it.
A separate High Court order requiring Winters to pay half of the respondents' costs was not appealed and remained outside this ruling.