The Court of Appeal today expressed its dismay over a “grossly disproportionate” dispute between neighbours that has taken up more court time than many murder trials, and seen the total legal costs bill spiral to more than half a million pounds.
The court gave its ruling in a battle between neighbours in Mobberley, Cheshire, and expressed frustration over the courts’ inability to prevent feuding litigants wasting time and money in this way.
Sir Stanley Burnton said: “This is a depressingly unfortunate dispute between neighbours. The costs so far approach half a million pounds, far more than the value of the rights involved. It is a dispute that could and should have been compromised on terms that both parties could live with.”
He said that the trial took 10 days, after which there was a “greatly regrettable lack of time for the judge to write his judgment until several months after the trial”, meaning the judge had to obtain transcripts of the proceedings which “added to the costs of this case for the legal system”.
Bean LJ said that he was dismayed by this “Dickensian litigation”.
He said: “The disputed strip of land and right of way do not constitute the sole means of access to anyone’s home. The award of damages to Mr & Mrs Gilks was £3,500.
“Yet, at a time when the courts are under great pressure, the battle between these two couples took up ten days of court time – more than some murder trials – before Judge Armitage and a further three days in this court; and about half a million pounds have been spent in costs.
“It is almost as though Lord Woolf and other civil procedure reformers over the years have laboured in vain.”
Expressing his own similar opinion, Christopher Clarke LJ added: “The enmity between the parties has caused them to incur costs and to use up the time of the courts (to the detriment of other litigants) to an extent grossly disproportionate to what was at stake.
“If parties, or one of them, insist on litigating in this way, it is difficult for the court to cut short their wasteful endeavours, however much it may try to do so. I hope that the example of this litigation may encourage others who are concerned in like disputes (and, as importantly, those who advise them) to take every step that they can to avoid the absurd waste of effort, time and cost (for both parties) which this case has involved.”
The Court allowed an appeal by Adrian and Joanne Hodgson in respect of a declaration of the true boundary of the neighbouring property Fiveacres owned by Richard and Heidi Gilks, and in respect of one right of way the Gilks claimed over the Hodgsons’ land.
However, it dismissed the Hodgsons’ appeal in respect of a second right of way, which means that the Gilks remain entitled to access Fiveacres across their neighbours’ property.
Gilks and anr v Hodgson and anr Court of Appeal (Christopher Clarke and Bean LJJ and Sir Stanley Burnton) 15 January 2015
Caroline Hutton (instructed by Geldards Solicitors LLP) for the appellants/defendants
Ian Foster (instructed by Ralli Solicitors LLP) for the respondents/claimants
