Bell & Anor v. East Renfrewshire Council & Anor [2006] ScotCS CSOH_9 (19 January 2006)

Bell & Anor v. East Renfrewshire Council & Anor [2006] ScotCS CSOH_9 (19 January 2006)

The applicant should not be liable for the expenses of the second and third respondents after the lodging of their answers, as their interests were not distinct from the first respondent and no separate issues were raised; established practice and relevant authorities dictate only one set of expenses is recoverable in such circumstances.

Citation
[2006] ScotCS CSOH_9
Parties
Applicant: Ashley Bell; First Respondent: East Renfrewshire Council; Second Respondent: George Wimpey UK Limited; Third Respondent: Carvill (Scotland) Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 238 of the Town and Country Planning (scotland) Act 1997 / Post Merits; Determination of Expenses
Outcome
Applicant found liable in expenses to the first respondent for the whole process; applicant found liable to the second and third respondents only up to and including the date of lodging their answers.
Legal Topics
Costs and Expenses, Multiple Representation, Planning Permission, Judicial Review
Administrative Law Planning Law Civil Procedure Costs and Expenses Multiple Representation Planning Permission Judicial Review

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashley Bell

Applicant

East Renfrewshire Council

First Respondent

George Wimpey UK Limited

Second Respondent

Carvill (Scotland) Limited

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Section 238 of the Town and Country Planning (scotland) Act 1997 / Post Merits; Determination of Expenses

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be liable for the expenses of the second and third respondents beyond the lodging of their answers
  2. 2 Whether multiple respondents with identical interests are entitled to separate sets of expenses

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant should not be liable for the expenses of the second and third respondents after the lodging of their answers, as their interests were not distinct from the first respondent and no separate issues were raised; established practice and relevant authorities dictate only one set of expenses is recoverable in such circumstances.

Court Disposition

Applicant found liable in expenses to the first respondent for the whole process; applicant found liable to the second and third respondents only up to and including the date of lodging their answers.

Orders

  • Applicant to pay the whole expenses of process to the first respondent.
  • Applicant to pay the expenses of the application to the second and third respondents only up to and including the date of lodging their answers.