Can a court order costs against someone who funded a party's litigation but wasn't a party themselves?

In limited circumstances, yes. While costs orders are normally made against the actual parties to a case, a court retains discretion in appropriate situations to order costs against someone who isn't a party but who played a significant role in funding or directing the litigation, particularly where that person had a real interest in the outcome and effectively controlled how the case was conducted, rather than simply being a family member offering ordinary financial support.

This kind of order is uncommon and generally reserved for situations where the non-party's involvement went well beyond simply helping pay legal bills, such as directing litigation strategy in a way that caused unnecessary costs, or where the arrangement appears designed to shield the real party in interest from a costs award. Courts weigh this carefully, since ordinary family support, such as a parent helping an adult child pay for a lawyer, isn't itself grounds for a costs order against the person who helped. Anyone concerned about a non-party's role in funding the other side's litigation should raise it with their lawyer, since establishing this kind of claim requires specific evidence about that person's actual involvement and control.