Harry A Coff Ltd., R (on the application of) v Environment Agency

Harry A Coff Ltd., R (on the application of) v Environment Agency

The District Judge was wrong in law to refuse a defendant's costs order in favour of the company solely on the basis of the amount claimed and on findings about the relationship between the company and Michael Coff that were unsupported by evidence. The proper course was to make the order and leave the assessment of costs to the appropriate process.

Parties
Claimant: Harry A Coff Limited; Defendant: Environment Agency
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (appeal by Case Stated) / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Defendant's Costs Order, Assessment of Costs, Misidentification of Defendant, Corporate Veil
Criminal Law Costs Defendant's Costs Order Assessment of Costs Misidentification of Defendant Corporate Veil

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harry A Coff Limited

Claimant

Environment Agency

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (appeal by Case Stated) / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the District Judge was wrong in law in refusing to make a costs order in favour of the company after dismissal of charges
  2. 2 Whether findings about the relationship between the company and Michael Coff were supported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The District Judge was wrong in law to refuse a defendant's costs order in favour of the company solely on the basis of the amount claimed and on findings about the relationship between the company and Michael Coff that were unsupported by evidence. The proper course was to make the order and leave the assessment of costs to the appropriate process.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • District Judge's refusal of a defendant's costs order quashed
  • Defendant's costs order in favour of the company substituted