B (A Minor Suing by His Mother and Next Friend X) v The Board of Management of St Q's College (Approved)

2.������ Counsel for B went into some detail about B�s case. Counsel for C went into less detail. The underlying facts of both cases are in any event well-known to the court and treated with by it in its previous judgment, so either approach was fine. The salient points of fact that counsel wanted to mention about their respective client�s cases are set out below.

5.������ The point made by B in the within application is that he could not exit from the process at any stage. As his counsel put it in court, he had to �come the whole journey�, and that is why he came looking for his costs even in the judicial review proceedings after electing to divert into the s.29 process.

Result: C is awarded costs of the leave application and the costs application. B is awarded costs of the leave application and hopes that counsel will agree to costs for the judicial review and costs application; if not, then it will be heard before this Court. Costs flow in favour of the applicants from their successful leave applications.