Perinpanathan, R (on the application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court & Anor (Rev 1)

Perinpanathan, R (on the application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court & Anor (Rev 1)

The principle in City of Bradford v Booth applies to forfeiture proceedings under section 298 of POCA. Where the police act honestly, reasonably, and properly in pursuing forfeiture, and there is no unreasonable conduct, the default position is that no order for costs should be made against them, even if the application fails. Section 64 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 does not create a presumption that costs follow the event. The magistrates did not err in refusing to order the police to pay the appellant’s costs.

Parties
Appellant: Amaravathi Perinpanathan; First Respondent: City of Westminster Magistrates Court; Second Respondent: Metropolitan Police Commissioner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Appeal From Divisional Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs Orders, Proceeds of Crime, Police Powers, Judicial Review, Forfeiture Proceedings
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law Costs Orders Proceeds of Crime Police Powers Judicial Review Forfeiture Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 36 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amaravathi Perinpanathan

Appellant

City of Westminster Magistrates Court

First Respondent

Metropolitan Police Commissioner

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Appeal From Divisional Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether magistrates erred in refusing to order the police to pay the appellant's costs after unsuccessful forfeiture proceedings under section 298 of POCA
  2. 2 Whether the principle in City of Bradford v Booth applies to costs in POCA forfeiture proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The principle in City of Bradford v Booth applies to forfeiture proceedings under section 298 of POCA. Where the police act honestly, reasonably, and properly in pursuing forfeiture, and there is no unreasonable conduct, the default position is that no order for costs should be made against them, even if the application fails. Section 64 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 does not create a presumption that costs follow the event. The magistrates did not err in refusing to order the police to pay the appellant’s costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order for costs against the police; each party to bear their own costs.