A barrister who claimed he did not have the opportunity to make submissions on costs has had his application for judicial review dismissed after the High Court found he was not prevented from standing up.
Mohammad Tayyab Khan was representing his wife Tilat Khan who contested liability for a council tax order. Two justices at Leicester magistrates’ court declined to quash the liability and Khan was ordered to pay £13,500 costs to Leicester City Council.
Khan applied for judicial review, arguing he had not had a fair opportunity to make submissions to the justices on the issue of costs.
In Tilat Khan, R (on the application of) v Leicester Magistrates’ Court, Richard Kimblin KC, sitting as a deputy high court judge, said: ‘This case is not about refusal. There is no evidence that either the justices or their legal advisor turned Mr Khan away when he sought to say something. They did not receive written submissions and refuse to consider them. Rather, this case is about whether Mr Khan had a proper chance to make his oral submissions.’
The judge found the evidence did not indicate that Khan was ‘deprived of an opportunity to make submissions on costs’. Dismissing the application, he added: ‘In my judgment, the key question is one of opportunity. In that regard I find that Mr Khan was in a position to make submissions on costs.
Read more
‘He had the costs schedule and sufficient notice of the application that he would face if the court did not accept his client’s case. There is no evidence that Mr Khan was prevented from standing up to make submissions. The act of standing up is both physical and a signal to the court. That opportunity was present from the time that the costs application was made until the justices returned from their retirement.'
The application for judicial review was dismissed and Khan was ordered to pay Leicester City Council, the interested party, £16,500 costs after the judge found the costs schedule of more than £33,000 put forward by the local authority was ‘disproportionate’.
