Taxi Driver Online

I was being generous Geoff when I said it "may" cost ten grand. Twenty grand is a reasonable assumption and one that I can't argue with.

I understand it cost Stockport Council in the region of 12 grand when they lost their case over changing the "colour of Stockports Cabs" and that didn't take into account their own costs.

The price of litigiation can be a costly business indeed.

Best wishes

JD

Of course if one wins, then it costs you nothing.

But I think even costs of £10,000 are slightly high. Unless the case is appealed to the High Court.

At Crown Court you will pay about £1,500-£2,000 for a good licensing barrister. Most un-met cases are dealt with in a day.

Then you put the costs of preparing the action, the solicitor's time in court (which is not essential) and the barrister's opinion. This shouldn't add much more to the bill than another £2,000.

So really the most it should cost for an appeal against a refusal of a HC vehicle license at Crown Court is four to five grand for your costs. However if you lose the judge may award the council their costs.

But if you are nice and act contrite, then he may just lets each party pay their own.

_________________
IDFIMH

Ah the infamous Jim Mortell, I thought he'd gone on to patures new? Ask him about those 20 plates he's got sat in his desk, them plates no driver wants.

On what do you base that Yorkie.

Its not a case of spin its a case of offering opinion, I provide an explaination as to why I believe the problem of unmet demand will not be solved by derestricting the HC sector. You have not provided even your opinion on how deresrtiction would illeviate unmet demand when it is blatantly obvious to any fair minded person that a proportion of complaints are made against the PH sector which has no restriction. Consider the implications of current PH drivers joining the HC sector as independants, adding to unmet demand within the PH sector.

I believe that most people fighting for derestriction are doing so for their own best interests and certainly not the best interest of the consumer, your input to the debate by just saying "your wrong" without offering any reasoning shows your reluctance to show your true objective.

There is no appeal to the High Court Sussex, the Crown is as far as it goes in this type of case. I'll buy you a plate if you can show me any section 16 case that has been heard in the high court. (Refusal to grant an applicant a Hackney Carriage Proprietors license, under sec 16 1985 T act) Note I said section 16. That should keep you busy for an hour or two. lol.

The breakdown of cost is not as simple as you may think. Besides your solicitors costs which could be anything from 3 grand upwards depending on the amount of hours worked and the number of letters he sends out and the grade of solicitor.

You also have to take into consideration that a good solicitor will normally advise you to have a barristers opinion sought, this will cost you at least a grand and consists of a meeting between the Barrister or QC, the applicant, the solicitor and solicitor’s clerk.

The meeting will inform you of the law, current case law and the chance of your appeal succeeding. The solicitors charge for this meeting is not included in the cost of the Barristers opinion. If you then decide to go ahead with the challenge then that’s when the costs really start to mount up.

To build a case against the council the solicitor will have to liaise with the Barrister and present him with the evidence of discovery that he has obtained from the council and the relevant case law appertaining to your case.

The number of hours you are billed will depend on how much work the solicitor has put in. The solicitor or representative will normally turn up on the day of the case. Every letter he sends will cost you at "least" 130 pounds. You can count on being billed for at least 20 hours work. That’s going to set you back 3 grand. If you supply an expert witness in court that will set you back another 660 pounds.

You will have your Barrister and Barrister’s assistant’s fee to pay which depending on how far up the pecking order he is could cost you anything from 250 an hour upwards.

The costs soon mount up I can assure you.

You could of course go down the road of Litigant in Person, otherwise known as a LIP. A litigant in person is a person who represents themselves. He or she is allowed one friend to assist them in court, otherwise referred to as a McKenzie friend. This term is taken from the case of McKenzie v McKenzie which reaffirmed the original case law that dates back to the 1800's.

The McKenzie ruling upheld that of Lord Tenterden in Collier v Hicks on the 7 June 1831 which stated that:

"Any person, whether he be a professional man or not, may attend as a friend of either party, may take notes, may quietly make suggestions, and give advice .."

The legal costs for a LIP are set at a maximum of 9.25 an hour but that does not include disbursements. Any and all disbursements that are claimed by the LIP must be documented in full and presented to the court for validation. Expert witnesses and such like come under the heading of disbursements.

Normally you would write to the court and inform them that you will be appearing as Litigant in person and that you are exercising the right to have a McKenzie friend assist you. Normally you would supply the court with the name and occupation of the person who is going to assist you.

Lips normally represent themselves when they think they are best placed to prosecute the action themselves, or alternately they can't raise the finance to have a legal expert act on their behalf. The litigant will be expected to understand court procedure and protocol and familiarise themselves with the legal etiquette that is practiced in our courts.

There were some ten thousand lip cases in 2003 so that gives you an idea of the level of participation. Normally Lips who prosecute a case through the higher courts have some form of legal experience but in the lower courts such as magistrate’s courts it is common to see legally inexperienced people representing themselves.

Why don’t you try it sometime? you will feel quite jubilant after you have whipped the Barristers azz.


Best wishes

JD

Steve, I posted some details in the reply I gave to Sussex, they may give you an indication as to what cost are involved. You may also wish to look up the costs of the recent Stockport case which estimates among the stockport cabbies put the councils cost at anything between 12 grand and 16 grand.

Best wishes

JD

I meant the Appeal Court.

_________________
IDFIMH

I can only go by the costs incurred by a friend in a near by district, and his total costs (I've seen the break down) for a day barrister, an opinion, solicitor's preparation etc was just under £4,000.

Thankfully they won, but that's what the other side had to pay.

Admittedly they did a huge amount of work themselves, which saved them a lot of money, but that was the total price. I saw it myself.

_________________
IDFIMH

yes Sussex but youve only seen half of it, if hed lost he would have paid that plus the councils, they do a lot too buts its all costed

stick to 20 grand, and use your loaf

From my experience, costs from private firms are usually 50% higher than those from councils.

_________________
IDFIMH

Well I might not be due a full plate from you, but maybe a significant part of one.

In R v Brighton Borough Council ex p Bunch [1989] COD 558 a group of lads sought judicial review of the council's actions following an SUD survey.

They were advised, rightly or wrongly (wrongly in my hindsight view), by their legal team to go down this route.

To cut a long story very short, the judge ruled in favour of the council, but then stated at the end of the hearing that they were in the wrong court, and the lads would have been better served in the lower court.

Now why couldn't he have said that before the f***ing thing started?

_________________
IDFIMH

you are cheating Sussex judicial review is not a section 16 case

the judge was saying this case should have been a section 16 case

another one is Mellor v Leeds City council.
Mellor won but went bust.

You're comparing apples with pears Sussex. I said individual appeals under section 16 not judicial reviews of a council’s reassonableness of a decision.

I can give you endless cases of disgruntled taxi associations and drivers who have tried to question a councils decision at judicial review.

A judicial review is a judicial revue an appeal against being refused a license is a totally different legal application. You can't appeal the decision of a crown court Judge not to grant you a licence under section 16, unless I assume some Impropriety by the court took place . No more red herrings please.

You're application for a plate is therefore put on hold until you can come up with the appropriate evidence I have asked for in order that I should buy you a plate? lol

Best wishes

JD