Buckinghamshire Council v Jimmy Barrett & Ors (No 2: costs)

Buckinghamshire Council v Jimmy Barrett & Ors (No 2: costs)

80% of the claimant's costs are attributable to Mr Barrett due to his primary responsibility for the planning breaches; of that, 70% are reasonable and recoverable. The failed application against Persons Unknown was not unreasonable and does not justify a punitive or deterrent costs order. Six weeks is a fair extension for payment given Mr Barrett's circumstances.

Parties
Claimant: Buckinghamshire Council; First Defendant: Jimmy Barrett; Defendant: Persons Unknown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (costs Application) / Post Judgment (costs Assessment)
Outcome
Costs order in favour of the claimant against the first defendant, apportioned and reduced as specified.
Legal Topics
Costs, Injunctions, Apportionment, Summary Assessment
Civil Procedure Planning Law Costs Injunctions Apportionment Summary Assessment

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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Buckinghamshire Council

Claimant

Jimmy Barrett

First Defendant

Persons Unknown

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (costs Application) / Post Judgment (costs Assessment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 How should costs be apportioned between defendants in planning injunction proceedings?
  2. 2 What proportion of the claimant's costs are reasonable and recoverable from the first defendant?
  3. 3 Is a punitive or deterrent costs order justified due to the failed application against Persons Unknown?

Ratio Decidendi

80% of the claimant's costs are attributable to Mr Barrett due to his primary responsibility for the planning breaches; of that, 70% are reasonable and recoverable. The failed application against Persons Unknown was not unreasonable and does not justify a punitive or deterrent costs order. Six weeks is a fair extension for payment given Mr Barrett's circumstances.

Court Disposition

Costs order in favour of the claimant against the first defendant, apportioned and reduced as specified.

Orders

  • Mr Barrett to pay 80% of the claimant's costs, of which 70% are recoverable, within 6 weeks from 25 January 2024.
  • Parties to agree an order reflecting the terms of the judgment.