Claim for costs against third party local authority, Croydon LBC after four day private law fact finding hearing. F said that M had fabricated illnesses both in herself and the child leading to the LA being asked to prepare a report. That report failed to allow for established guidance on the topic, leading to the abandonment of a listing to hear the case.
Held: ‘The failings outlined above (and, in fairness, to some extent conceded by Mr. Calway) comfortably carry this case over the ‘exceptionality’ threshold. The consequence of the Local Authority’s failure to comply appropriately with the direction of the Court was the inevitable abandonment of the fact-finding hearing in December 2012, the requirement for a further directions hearing, and the consequent delay (with its financial and emotional cost to the parties) in re-listing it ‘
Judges:
Cobb J
Citations:
[2013] EWHC 1956 (Fam), [2013] PTSR 1579, [2016] 1 FLR 92, [2015] Fam Law 371, [2013] 5 Costs LR 738, [2013] 3 FCR 318, [2013] Fam Law 1258
Links:
Statutes:
Children Act 1989, Family Procedure Rules 2010 28.1, Senior Courts Act 1981 51(1)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Aiden Shipping Co Ltd v Interbulk Ltd (The ‘Vimeira’) HL 1986
Wide Application of Costs Against Third Party
A claim had been made against charterers by the ship owners, and in turn by the charterers against their sub-charterers. Notice of motion were issued after arbitration awards were not accepted. When heard, costs awards were made, which were now . .
Cited – Symphony Group Plc v Hodgson CA 4-May-1993
A section 51 non-party costs application should not be used as a substitute for the pursuit of a related cause of action against the non-party in ordinary proceedings. Nine rules were set out for allowing a costs order against someone who is not a . .
Cited – A and S (Children) v Lancashire County Council FD 17-Apr-2013
The children applied for their costs. They had been made subject of freeing orders on the application of the respondent, but had then successfully appealed against the orders, saying that their human rights had been infringed. . .
Cited – Northampton Health Authority v The Official Solicitor and the Governors of St Andrews Hospital 1994
. .
Cited – In re T (Children) SC 25-Jul-2012
The local authority had commenced care proceedings, alleging abuse. After lengthy proceedings, of seven men and two grandparents, all but one were exonerated. The grandparents had not been entitled to legal aid, and had had to mortgage their house . .
Cited – London Borough of Sutton v Davis (Costs) (No 2) 1994
In cases involving children costs awarded against one parent or another are exceptional since the court is anxious to avoid the situation where a parent may feel ‘punished’ by the other parent which will reduce co-operation between them. This will . .
Cited – Kelly v South Manchester Health Authority 1997
A costs order was sought against the Legal Aid Board.
Thomas J. said: ‘In my judgment, the courts do have power in an appropriate and exceptional case to make an order in respect of costs against the board under section 51(1); the role of the . .
Cited – Globe Equities Ltd v Globe Legal Services Ltd and others CA 5-Mar-1999
The defendant’s solicitors appealed an order making them liable for costs in defending an action brought by the landlord. . .
Cited – Coventry City Council v X, Y and Z (Care Proceedings: Costs: Identification of Local Authority) FD 27-Sep-2010
Order made for identification of local authority criticised in care proceedings and order for costs. . .
Cited – Providence Capitol Trustees Ltd v Ayres ChD 1996
If the Pensions Ombudsman takes part in an appeal and makes himself a party to the lis, he is at risk as to the costs of the appeal. It may be appropriate to make an application before the main hearing to settle such issues. The ombudsman will only . .
Cited – Palmer v The Estate of Kevin Palmer Deceased and others CA 6-Feb-2008
The judge had concluded that the insurers’ conduct of an unsuccessful defence was sufficiently self-motivated to make it the real defendant in all but name, and the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against an order that it be liable in costs as . .
Cited – Dolphin Quays Developments Ltd v Mills and others ChD 17-May-2007
Order for costs against a third party . .
Cited – Metalloy Supplies Ltd (In Liquidation) v MA (UK) Ltd CA 7-Oct-1996
A costs order against liquidator of company in litigation is only rarely to be given. The court should ask who is the ‘real’ party to the litigation.
Millett LJ said: ‘[An order] may be made in a wide variety of circumstances where the third . .
Cited – In re X, (Emergency Protection Orders) FD 16-Mar-2006
Within two hours of a case conference which mentioned possible removal of children, but agreed other steps, the local authority applied for an emergency protection order, and forcibly removed the child from the family.
Held: The decision . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Backhouse CA 26-Jan-2001
A non-party costs order was made against the director, because the defence to the petitions was not conducted in the bona fide belief that it was in the interests of the companies. Instead the director, who had treated the companies’ money as his . .
Cited – Goodwood Recoveries Ltd v Breen CA 19-Apr-2005
A claim against the defendant for money owed to someone else had been bought by the claimant of which Slater, a solicitor, was a director and shareholder. The claim was pursued in the name of the claimant by Slater as its solicitor and principal . .
Cited – Phillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis), Papadimitriou v Symes (A Bankrupt) Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership) Jean-Louis Domercq ChD 20-Oct-2004
Dr Z had given expert evidence in the principal proceedings. It was now said that that evidence had not been given in the proper way, and a remedy was now sought in costs.
Peter Smith J had held that: ‘It seems to me that in the administration . .
Cited – Phillips v Symes CA 2003
Courts should be reluctant to exclude altogether evidence merely because it is written. If the purpose of the order sought was to trace assets it would be wrong to permit cross-examination which was designed to show that there had been a contempt of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Costs, Children
Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.512445
