Director of Public Prosecutions v Northampton Magistrates' Court
[2024] EWHC 2860 (Admin)
Paul Black, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice
7 June 2024
[2024] EWHC 1376 (Admin)
High Court
A prisoner owed money for losing a court case. He then won a smaller amount in a different court case. The first court decided it was fair to take the smaller amount from what he owed, preventing him from getting a small win while ignoring the bigger debt.
Key Facts
- •Paul Black, a prisoner, had a judicial review claim against the Secretary of State for Justice (SSJ) dismissed with a costs order of £2,856.
- •Black subsequently won a county court claim against the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) for £150 damages.
- •The SSJ applied to the High Court for a set-off of the £150 damages against the outstanding £2,856 costs.
- •The application was made in the context of the concluded judicial review proceedings.
Legal Principles
The High Court has jurisdiction to permit set-off of sums payable under judgments and orders from different courts.
CPR 40.13A and Section 72 of the County Courts Act 1984
The court has a discretionary jurisdiction to order a set-off between different liabilities, applying the test of what is just in the circumstances.
Fearns v Anglo-Dutch Paint & Chemical Co Limited [2010] EWHC 2366 (Ch)
Outcomes
The High Court granted the SSJ's application for set-off.
The court found it just to allow the set-off, considering the connection between both claims relating to prison correspondence and the unfairness of allowing Black to receive damages while owing significant unpaid costs. The court also considered, and rejected, various arguments raised by Black.
The £150 damages awarded to Black in the county court will be set off against the £2,856 costs he owes the SSJ from the High Court.
This decision balances the justice in both cases, preventing Black from benefiting from a 'double standard' by receiving damages while ignoring his cost liability.
The court deferred a decision on costs until further submissions were received.
The court acknowledged procedural issues with the initial costs submissions.
Similar Cases
Daniel Luke Woolley v Ministry of Justice
[2024] EWHC 304 (KB)
Ursula Riniker v Mostapha Al-Turk
[2023] EWHC 2910 (KB)
RESOURCE RECOVERY SOLUTIONS (DERBYSHIRE) LIMITED v DERBYSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL & Anor.
[2022] EWHC 1209 (TCC)
ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Ors (No. 2: Costs)
[2023] EWHC 1337 (KB)