Notwithstanding § 10–120 of the State Government Article, the validity of a regulation of the Commission shall be challenged in accordance with § 10–125 of the State Government Article. A party to a Commission proceeding, a person that has been granted intervention in a Commission proceeding, or a person that has been ordered to participate in a Commission proceeding that seeks to challenge a decision by the Commission to act by order rather than regulation shall seek judicial review of the Commission’s decision within 30 days after the Commission issues a final order in that proceeding. Notwithstanding any provision of the Administrative Procedure Act, an order of the Commission issued on or before June 30, 2000, in a generic or quasi–legislative proceeding, that is not the subject of a judicial proceeding pending as of June 1, 2004, is not invalid or unenforceable as a result of the order meeting the definition of a regulation under § 10–101 of the State Government Article.

Except for the staff of the Commission, a party or person in interest, including the People’s Counsel, that is dissatisfied by a final decision or order of the Commission may seek judicial review of the decision or order as provided in this subtitle. The Secretary of Natural Resources may seek judicial review under this subtitle of a final decision or order of the Commission made under §§ 7-201 through 7-204, § 7-207, or § 7-208 of this article that relates to the environmental aspects of power plant siting. The Secretary of the Environment may seek judicial review of a final decision or order of the Commission made under §§ 7-205 and 7-206 of this article. If the Motor Vehicle Administration suspends or revokes the registration of a motor vehicle carrier in accordance with an order of the Commission, only the order of the Commission is subject to review under this section.

Every final decision, order, or regulation of the Commission is prima facie correct and shall be affirmed unless clearly shown to be: unconstitutional; outside the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the Commission; made on unlawful procedure; arbitrary or capricious; affected by other error of law; or if the subject of review is an order entered in a contested proceeding after a hearing, unsupported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole.

A proceeding for review under § 3–202 of this subtitle shall be instituted in: the circuit court for any county in which the public service company that was a party in the proceeding provides service; or the Circuit Court for Baltimore City. If more than one proceeding to review an order or final decision of the Commission is instituted, on motion of any party, the court may transfer the proceeding to another court that has jurisdiction. If a rehearing by the Commission is applied for, a proceeding for judicial review may be filed after service of the decision of the Commission that denies the rehearing. The Commission may be a party to an appeal made under this section.

The Commission may, on terms it considers appropriate, stay the enforcement of a regulation or order that is the subject of a proceeding for review under this subtitle.

After an answer has been filed in a proceeding for review under § 3–202 of this subtitle, the matter shall stand ready for trial on 15 days’ notice by any party. This subsection does not apply to proceedings before the Appellate Court of Maryland or the Supreme Court of Maryland. A court shall give preference to a proceeding under this subtitle over all other civil actions except actions concerning elections, regardless of the position of the other actions on the docket. A court shall always be open for the trial of a proceeding under this subtitle.

By stipulation of all parties to a proceeding for review under § 3-202 of this subtitle, the court may shorten the record to be transmitted to the court. If the court determines that a party’s refusal to stipulate to limit the record is unreasonable, the court may assess the additional costs against the refusing party. The court may require or allow corrections of the record before the Commission or the certification of additional parts of the record as the court considers appropriate. Notwithstanding any other provision of law or rule of court to the contrary, a transcript need not be filed until after the expiration of the period of time for the filing of an answer.

Any party may introduce new evidence on judicial review. If the evidence presented on judicial review is materially different from the evidence presented at the hearing before the Commission, the court shall: unless all parties stipulate in writing to the contrary, refer a transcript of the new evidence to the Commission; and stay the proceedings for a period of time that the court considers appropriate. On receipt of a transcript in accordance with subsection (a)(2)(i) of this section, the Commission may modify its findings based on the new evidence. Within a period of time that the court specifies, the Commission shall file with the court a report of any action taken based on the new evidence. If, on referral, the Commission rescinds the action on which the appeal was taken, the court shall dismiss the appeal and any modification made by the Commission shall stand in place of the original action. If, on referral, the Commission does not rescind or modify the original action, the court shall render judgment on the original order. Further evidence may not be introduced in the reviewing court after referral to the Commission under this section unless the court finds that serious injustice would otherwise result from the failure to allow the introduction of the new evidence. The provisions of § 3-110(c) of this title relating to incriminating testimony apply to proceedings for judicial review under this subtitle.

A party aggrieved by a final judgment in any proceeding under this subtitle may appeal the judgment to the Appellate Court of Maryland in the manner provided by law for appeals in other civil cases.