UK case law
B v London Borough of Hackney
[2009] EWHC ADMIN 765 · High Court (Administrative Court) · 2009
The verbatim text of this UK judgment. Sourced directly from The National Archives Find Case Law. Not an AI summary, not a paraphrase — every word below is the original ruling, under Crown copyright and the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Full judgment
1. THE DEPUTY JUDGE: These proceedings between B and the London Borough of Hackney have been settled in every respect except for costs. Today, Mr Nabi on behalf of B applies for his costs on an indemnity basis. Mr Price on behalf of the local authority accepts that it is liable for the claimant's costs, but on a standard basis only.
2. The substance of Mr Nabi's claim is that the local authority have acted unreasonably in relation to this litigation, failing, he says, to deal properly with correspondence asking for acceptance that they were liable in principle and failing to deal in other respects with the costs claimed. It is however accepted on both sides that as late as Friday the parties were prepared to settle costs on a standard basis if it could be done then and on the basis that attendance today would not be necessary.
3. The attendance at court today has raised the costs, but I am not persuaded that there is anything in this claim which should cause an order to be made on an indemnity basis. I therefore order the defendant to pay the claimant's costs on a standard basis, to be assessed if not agreed.
4. MR NABI: My Lord, there are two further matters. First, the claimant seeks permission to withdraw the claim for judicial review, it having become academic.
5. THE DEPUTY JUDGE: Yes.
6. MR NABI: Secondly, detailed assessment of the claimant's publicly funded costs.
7. THE DEPUTY JUDGE: Yes, you may have that too.
8. MR NABI: I am grateful. Thank you.