Elghanian v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor (Ruling on Costs)

Elghanian v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor (Ruling on Costs)

The Second Respondent is not entitled to costs because there was no separate issue requiring its representation, and the Bolton principle applies. The analogy to judicial review costs for acknowledgment of service is not applicable to section 289 TCPA 1990 appeals, which have a distinct costs regime.

Parties
Applicant: Iraj Elghanian; First Respondent: Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government; Second Respondent: London Borough of Brent
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Statutory Appeal Under Section 289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Ruling on Costs After Refusal of Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Second Respondent's application for costs refused; First Respondent's costs awarded as unopposed.
Legal Topics
Costs, Statutory Appeals, Permission to Appeal, Enforcement Notices
Planning Law Civil Procedure Costs Statutory Appeals Permission to Appeal Enforcement Notices

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Iraj Elghanian

Applicant

Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

First Respondent

London Borough of Brent

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Statutory Appeal Under Section 289 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 / Ruling on Costs After Refusal of Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should pay the costs of the First and Second Respondents after refusal of permission to appeal under section 289 TCPA 1990
  2. 2 Whether the Second Respondent is entitled to costs or costs for preparation of skeleton argument

Ratio Decidendi

The Second Respondent is not entitled to costs because there was no separate issue requiring its representation, and the Bolton principle applies. The analogy to judicial review costs for acknowledgment of service is not applicable to section 289 TCPA 1990 appeals, which have a distinct costs regime.

Court Disposition

Second Respondent's application for costs refused; First Respondent's costs awarded as unopposed.

Orders

  • Applicant to pay First Respondent's costs in the sum of £4,734.00
  • Second Respondent's application for costs refused