Scott v Minister for Treasury and Resources and the AG [2020] JCA 123 (29 June 2020)

Scott v Minister for Treasury and Resources and the AG [2020] JCA 123 (29 June 2020)

The application for leave to appeal was demonstrably hopeless and the applicant should have understood this from the prior judgment. This constitutes exceptional circumstances justifying a departure from the ordinary rule on costs. However, given the applicant's limited means, only a modest costs order is appropriate.

Citation
[2020] JCA 123
Parties
Applicant: Jonathan Tindall Scott; First Respondent: Minister for Treasury and Resources; Second Respondent: Her Majesty's Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
29 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs Following Refusal of Leave to Appeal (judicial Review) / Post Judgment, Costs Determination
Outcome
Costs order against applicant granted in part.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Costs Orders, Leave to Appeal
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Costs Orders Leave to Appeal

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

Parties

Jonathan Tindall Scott

Applicant

Minister for Treasury and Resources

First Respondent

Her Majesty's Attorney General

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Costs Following Refusal of Leave to Appeal (judicial Review) / Post Judgment, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be ordered to pay the respondents' costs after refusal of leave to appeal against refusal of leave for judicial review.

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to appeal was demonstrably hopeless and the applicant should have understood this from the prior judgment. This constitutes exceptional circumstances justifying a departure from the ordinary rule on costs. However, given the applicant's limited means, only a modest costs order is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Costs order against applicant granted in part.

Orders

  • Applicant to pay respondents' costs in the sum of £50.