Adams, R (on the application of) v Special Investigations Unit [2008] EWHC 947 (Admin) (10 April 2008)

Adams, R (on the application of) v Special Investigations Unit [2008] EWHC 947 (Admin) (10 April 2008)

The claimant was not given a proper opportunity to argue against the making of a Recovery of Defence Costs Order under regulation 13; the judge had discretion to adjourn or make the order but failed to follow the correct procedure, resulting in procedural unfairness. The order must be quashed and the matter remitted to a different judge for reconsideration.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 947 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Terrance Adams; Defendant: Special Investigations Unit
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Hearing, Post Leave
Outcome
Order quashed and matter remitted to a different judge for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Recovery of Defence Costs, Judicial Review Procedure, Practice Direction (costs: Criminal Proceedings), Criminal Defence Service Regulations
Criminal Law Administrative Law Costs Recovery of Defence Costs Judicial Review Procedure Practice Direction (costs: Criminal Proceedings) Criminal Defence Service Regulations

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Terrance Adams

Claimant

Special Investigations Unit

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Hearing, Post Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was denied a proper opportunity to argue against a Recovery of Defence Costs Order under regulation 13
  2. 2 Whether the judge had discretion to adjourn or make the order under regulation 13
  3. 3 Proper procedure for making a Recovery of Defence Costs Order

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was not given a proper opportunity to argue against the making of a Recovery of Defence Costs Order under regulation 13; the judge had discretion to adjourn or make the order but failed to follow the correct procedure, resulting in procedural unfairness. The order must be quashed and the matter remitted to a different judge for reconsideration.

Court Disposition

Order quashed and matter remitted to a different judge for reconsideration.

Orders

  • The Recovery of Defence Costs Order made on 9 March 2007 is quashed.
  • The matter is remitted to the Blackfriars Crown Court for reconsideration before a different judge.