Case No: 99HCT5246
FD03P02594

Neutral Citation Number: [2003] EWHC 3086 (Fam)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION
PRINCIPAL REGISTRY
(In Private)
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London WC2A 2LL

Date: 15 December 2003

Before:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MUNBY

In the Matter of Angela RODDY (A Minor)
In the Matter of X (A Minor)
In the Matter of Y (A Minor)
And in the Matter of an application by
ASSOCIATED NEWSPAPERS LIMITED
 - - - - - - - - - - -
Between:

TORBAY BOROUGH COUNCIL
Claimant
- and -

NEWS GROUP NEWSPAPERS
Defendant
- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - -

Mr Mark Warby QC (instructed by Reynolds Porter Chamberlain) for the applicant
Associated Newspapers Limited
Mr Lee Arnot (instructed by Legal Services) for the claimant local authority
The defendant took no part in the application

No hearing (application dealt with on paper)
- - - - - - - - - - -
Judgment
Mr Justice Munby:

1.	I have now to decide the question of costs left undecided in my previous judgment: see Re Angela Roddy, Re an Application by Associated Newspapers Limited [2003] EWHC 2927 (Fam), paras [91], [93].

2.	ANL seeks an order that the local authority pays 80 per cent of the costs it incurred from 10.30 am on 27 November 2003, the day before the hearing. Those costs amount to £7,156. The local authority is content that there should be no order for costs. The parties have agreed that, subject to my agreement, I should determine this issue without a hearing and on the basis of brief written submissions. I have no hesitation whatever in agreeing to this eminently sensible proposal. ANL has also waived any right to reasons.

3.	Each party has submitted clear and helpful written submissions: those on behalf of ANL were prepared by Mr Warby QC and are dated 4 December, those on behalf of the local authority were prepared by Mr Arnot and are dated 6 December 2003.

4.	I have carefully considered each party’s written submissions. I have reread the judgment I handed down on 2 December 2003, but I have considered the question of costs afresh and without attaching any weight to the provisional view expressed in para [91] of that judgment.

5.	I have concluded that there should be no order for costs. In the circumstances there is no obligation on me to give any reasons and I have decided not to.

6.	If this has not already been done, the local authority should lodge with the Associate for sealing a draft order following, where appropriate, the form set out at para [90] of my previous judgment.