QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
B e f o r e :
|THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF THOMPSON||(CLAIMANT)|
|SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT||(DEFENDANT)|
|THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF NORTHUMBRIA POLICE||(INTERESTED PARTY)|
Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited
190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MR P NICHOLLS (instructed by Treasury Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the DEFENDANT
MR M GRAHAM (instructed by Dickinson Dees) appeared on behalf of
the INTERESTED PARTY
Crown Copyright ©
2nd October 2003
"As a matter of courtesy, if his consideration was one of costs, then he should be aware of the old law in the Police Act which meant that the police authority would pay the costs whether or not he was successful. I was aware that not all solicitors were aware of this provision and I was also not aware as to whether he was still supported by the Federation and thus whether the Federation had pointed this out. I could find the law if he was unaware of it, but this was just a matter of courtesy because I was aware that not all solicitors are aware of the old procedure."
"It has been my experience that solicitors inexperienced in dealing with Home Office appeals, assume that 'costs follow the event'. I wanted therefore to point out that this was not the case and to direct Mr Campbell to the relevant provision.
I did say that the Police Authority would pay the costs whether or not he (Mr Thompson) was successful, i.e, costs do not follow the event. I did not point out the exceptional case where an order may be made for an appellant to pay his own costs, because such was not at the forefront of my mind. I did not think I was giving legal advice -- I was merely hoping to point another solicitor in the right direction. If I had in any way thought that I was making a legal submission which would become the subject of proceedings I would have done it properly and in writing. In my experience, solicitors help each other on a daily basis but it is the solicitor with a duty to his client who has the duty to look up the law for him/herself.
I offered to send Mr Campbell a copy of the relevant provision. I never received such a request."
Mr Campbell duly represented the claimant in the appeal and instructed counsel to conduct it.
"This process now allows him to do so. However in our client's view the original order as to costs remains a proper exercise of discretion and unless swayed by the submissions of the appellant the tribunal should not change their earlier recommendation on costs."
"The appellant's case was fully put and the witnesses were cross-examined. PC McIntyre was cross-examined on some personal and very private matters, the sole purpose being to embarrass her. Furthermore, the appellant put the complainants through two hearings and made them relive these unpleasant and dreadful experiences."
"9. The original appeal was without merit. The Chief Constable had not believed the appellant. The appellant knew how he had behaved towards the complainants. There was overwhelming evidence against the appellant. The appeal was misconceived. Complainants were made to re-live their dreadful experiences. The appellant appeared to enjoy their discomfort and embarrassment.
10. We bear in mind the appellant's financial circumstances. We remind ourselves that ordering an appellant to pay his own costs is an exceptional step. But the nature of the allegations, pursuit of the appeal in the face of overwhelming evidence, the nature of some of the questions put to the complainants and his behaviour at the appeal does make this case exceptional."
"Where the resources of a party ordered to pay costs are limited, the court should not force the receiving party to engage in detailed assessment proceedings before receiving any money at all, since this would merely require the expenditure of further money on a process which would produce no return. The judge awarded interim payments in an amount which he regarded as the absolute bear minimum that the defendants could hope to recover on a detailed assessment: Allason v Random House Laddie J."
"Where the resources of a party ordered to pay costs are limited, the court should not force the receiving party to engage in detailed assessment proceedings before receiving any money at all since this would merely require the expenditure of further money on a process which would produce no return. The judge awarded an interim payment in an amount which he recorded as the absolute bare minimum that the defendants could hope to recover on a detailed assessment."
Accordingly Mr Nicholls invites me to make an interim order in the sum of £2,000.