Minister for Planning and Environment and Fairman -v- Hobson [2014] JCA 174 (17 September 2014)

Minister for Planning and Environment and Fairman -v- Hobson [2014] JCA 174 (17 September 2014)

Indemnity costs should not be awarded against the Minister as there was no conduct in the litigation or circumstances taking the case out of the norm; pre-litigation conduct or decision-making process alone does not justify indemnity costs in public law cases. Standard basis costs are appropriate.

Citation
[2014] JCA 174
Parties
First Appellant: The Minister for Planning and Environment; Second Appellant: Bernard William Fairman and Julia Lumsden Fairman nee Coleman; Respondents: Andrew Alvin Hobson and Maureen Audrey Hobson
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
17 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Substantive Appeal, Costs Determination
Outcome
Indemnity costs award set aside; substituted with standard basis costs. Minister to pay Hobsons' costs of resisting appeal on standard basis. No costs order against Fairmans.
Legal Topics
Costs, Indemnity Costs, Public Law Challenges, Discretion in Costs Awards
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Costs Indemnity Costs Public Law Challenges Discretion in Costs Awards

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Minister for Planning and Environment

First Appellant

Bernard William Fairman and Julia Lumsden Fairman nee Coleman

Second Appellant

Andrew Alvin Hobson and Maureen Audrey Hobson

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Post Substantive Appeal, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded against a public official based on pre-litigation conduct or decision-making process
  2. 2 Appropriate basis for costs in appeal proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Indemnity costs should not be awarded against the Minister as there was no conduct in the litigation or circumstances taking the case out of the norm; pre-litigation conduct or decision-making process alone does not justify indemnity costs in public law cases. Standard basis costs are appropriate.

Court Disposition

Indemnity costs award set aside; substituted with standard basis costs. Minister to pay Hobsons' costs of resisting appeal on standard basis. No costs order against Fairmans.

Orders

  • Indemnity costs award from Royal Court set aside and replaced with standard basis costs.
  • Minister to pay Hobsons' costs of resisting Minister's appeal, assessed on standard basis.