Parking Costs: Chaos in Glasgow’s West End

A protected expenses order has been granted at the Court of Session in favour of a community council limiting its liability for the costs of an appeal against a decision by Glasgow City Council.

Hillhead Community Council (HCC) brought an appeal against the proposed Glasgow City Council (Hillhead) (Traffic Management and Parking Control) Order 2014.  If granted, that Order would see the introduction by Glasgow City Council of parking bays for use by both residents and visitors.  The cost of a permit would be reduced for residents and visitors would park on a pay and display basis.

HCC brought a challenge in the Court of Session against the local authority’s decision to allow others to use resident-only parking spaces.  HCC maintain that the city council failed to consider all objections to the making of the order and to have regard to national air quality strategy.

The HCC secretary fears such changes would lead to “traffic chaos”.  One current permit holder, a single mother of three with a disabled child uses her car for runs to two different schools and trips to hospital, says the “system will benefit people from outside the area and meet the demands of businesses.  Residents do not want it.”

In early April 2015, Lord Bannatyne ruled that it would be “fair and just” to limit the community council’s liability for legal expenses to £1,000 as they would not otherwise be able to afford to proceed with the action.  He also determined that the local authority’s liability should be limited to £15,000.

A protective costs order can be made at any stage of proceedings on such conditions as the court thinks fit, provided that the court is satisfied that:

  • The issues raised are of general public importance
  • The public interest requires that those issues should be resolved
  • The applicant has no private interest in the outcome of the case
  • Having regard to the financial resources of the applicant and the respondent and to the amount of costs there are likely to be involved, it is fair and just to make the order
  • And if the order is not made the applicant will probably discontinue the proceedings and will be acting reasonably in doing so

Lord Bannatyne in a written opinion said “I conclude that having regard to the first appellants’ financial circumstances including the sum raised to date for this action and their own legal expenses together with the general financial position of the respondents it would be fair and just to limit their liability and the expenses to the respondents to the figure of £1000.” This decision was greatly welcomed by the Community Council.

We await developments with interest.

This entry was posted in In The News by Paul Neilly. Bookmark the permalink.

About Paul Neilly

Paul’s first degree was a BA Honours in Financial Services following which he spent five years working for a large insurance company as a pensions specialist. He then completed his law degree at the University of Strathclyde and Diploma in Legal Practice at the Glasgow Graduate School of Law. Paul subsequently joined Mitchells Roberton as a trainee in July 2006 and qualified as a solicitor in September 2008. Principally concerned with civil litigation, Paul specialises in contract disputes, landlord and tenant issues (commercial and residential), debt recovery, family law, employment law and personal injury claims. He also handles cases involving Adults with Incapacity. Paul regularly appears in the Sheriff Courts throughout Scotland and has experience of appearing before Licensing Boards and instructing matters in the Court of Session. Being a general civil litigator Paul is keenly aware of the need to keep step with developments in the law and legal education. This led Paul to join the committee of TANQ, the Trainee and Newly Qualified Society of the Royal Faculty of Procurators in Glasgow, in which role Paul currently organises seminars and networking events for its members. Paul is married with a young son and daughter. In his spare time he enjoys cooking, reading and watching sport, particularly following the exploits of the national football and rugby teams, although this is more of a vocation than a source of enjoyment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s