header-logo header-logo

Costs

29 March 2012
Issue: 7507 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Lovebox Festivals Ltd [2012] All ER (D) 128 (Mar)

The words “just and reasonable” in s 64 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1981 did not apply solely to quantum. The discretion conferred by that section on a magistrates’ court to make an order as it thought just and reasonable applied equally to a decision as to which party, if any, should pay the costs of the appeal. What was just and reasonable would depend on all the relevant facts and circumstances of the case.

Costs might follow the event, but it might not be so. Where a complainant had successfully challenged an administrative decision of an authority and that authority had acted reasonably in the exercise of its public duty, a court should consider: (i) the financial prejudice to the particular claimant if an order for costs was not to be made in his favour; and (ii) the need for licensing authorities to make reasonable and apparently sound administrative decisions without suffering financial prejudice if those decisions

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll