Subscribe RSS
Comment RSS
Cannell v. Scottish Ministers
April 28, 2009 | No CommentsThe Inner House rejected the claim that statutory provision which failed to provide for recovery of expenses (costs) from the respondents incurred by the petitioner in the course of his ultimately successful appeal against a listed building enforcement notice requiring him to restore certain panels to his private house, a listed building, was contrary to his Convention rights. The Court held that the decision by the respondents to refuse to reimburse him for his costs did not impose on the petitioner an excessive burden disproportionate to any aim legitimate for the state to seek to achieve and his rights under Article 1 Protocol 1 (and article 8 ) of the Convention were accordingly not infringed. [1]
[1] See similarly McFadyen v Gatley, 2000 SLT (Sh Ct) 41 upholding the non-award of expenses incurred by an individual defending himself against the Crown’s application for his extradition to Switzerland, which was abandoned. The sheriff was unwilling to upset what he regarded as the long-established rule in Scotland which was that no expenses should be awarded either to or against a prosecutor acting in the public interest.
Environmental and Planning Law, Property Law, Protocol 1, Art. 1 Right to Private Property
