text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Criminal Justice and Courts Bill - Clause 58 - Judicial Review - Interveners and Costs
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  @ MP voted aye against a presumption that interveners in judicial review cases will be required to pay any costs incurred by other parties as a result of their intervention.
  @ MP voted no in favour of a presumption that interveners in judicial review cases will be required to pay any costs incurred by other parties as a result of their intervention.
  
  The majority of MPs in favour of a presumption that [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intervention_%28law%29 interveners] in judicial review cases will be required to pay any costs incurred by other parties as a result of their intervention.
  
  Interveners are not parties to the case, but they can put additional information and perspectives before the court. During the debate it was said[2]:
  
  :The role of interveners is most often to assist the court, and the most frequent interveners are organisations such as Liberty and Justice, whose expertise has proven invaluable in many cases
  
  The motion rejected by the majority of MPs in this vote was:
  
  :Amendment proposed: 35, page 58, line 2, leave out clause 58
  
  Clause 58[3] required the court to order an intervener to pay any costs the court considers have been incurred result of the intervenerâs involvement in the proceedings.
  
  
  * [1] [http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/criminaljusticeandcourts.html Parliament's webpage on the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill]
  * [2] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2014-06-17a.963.2#g966.0 Andy Slaughter MP (Hammersmith, Labour), House of Commons 17 June 2014]
  * [3] [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2014-2015/0004/cbill_2014-20150004_en_7.htm#pt4-pb1-l1g58 Clause 58 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill as at the time of the vote]
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  