Moore’s (Wallisdown) Ltd v Pensions Ombudsman and Another; Royal and Sun Alliance Life and Pensions Ltd v Same: ChD 21 Dec 2001

The applicants had successfully appealed against decisions of the Pensions Ombudsman. They sought their costs. The Ombudsman argued that the costs should be limited to the proportion by which they had in fact contributed to the need for an appeal.
Held: The Ombudsman was no different to any other tribunal which itself became party to a case, and a costs order could be made against them. Here, the Ombudsman’s and Trustee’s cases were not distinguishable, and there should not have been separate representation. Though the Ombudsman should pay all the costs of the applicants, no order was made for the costs of the trustees.


Ferris J


Times 01-Mar-2002


England and Wales


CitedElliott and Another v Pensions Ombudsman and Others ChD 20-Nov-1997
Costs of appeal against Ombudsman’s determination to be assessed according to extent of participation. . .
Wrongly decidedUniversity of Nottingham v Eyett and Another (No 2) ChD 3-Dec-1998
The Pensions’ Ombudsman having had a decision overturned on appeal and having entered appearance at the appeal was liable in costs only to the extent that his intervention had increased the costs. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Administrative

Updated: 11 April 2022; Ref: scu.167673