Quine Brothers Prosecution/Appeal

Summary

The request sought details on the financial relief and legal costs awarded in the Quine Brothers vs DEFA Chancery Court case. The Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture disclosed that £11,000 plus VAT and disbursements had been agreed and paid, while noting that further costs remain subject to detailed claim.

Key Facts

• The case reference is CHP 2019 83, heard in the High Court of Justice of the Isle of Man.
• Judgment was delivered by Deemster Corlett on 24 January 2020.
• The Department agreed to pay £11,000 in legal costs to the Claimants.
• An additional £473.00 was paid for VAT and disbursements.
• Some further costs have not yet been claimed or assessed.

Data Disclosed

• £11,000
• £473.00
• 24 January 2020
• 2019
• 83
• 2021-10-29
• 2021-11-01
• 2060125

Original Request

With reference to this Chancery Court case - QUINE & otr v DEFA Case Reference - Division Code CHP Case Reference - Year 2019 Case Reference - Number 83 Court HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ISLE OF MAN Division CIVIL - CHANCERY PROCEDURE Judgment Date 24 January 2020 The Judgment of His Honour Deemster Corlett Party One Iain David Quine Advocate Party One Richard Halsall (Bridson Halsall) Party Two Robert Michael Quine Advocate Party Two Richard Halsall (Bridson Halsall) Party Three Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture Advocate Party Three Keiron Murray (Attorney General's Chambers) which you can find here - https://www.judgments.im/content/J2641.htm In his Judgement Deemster Corlett stated in 136 and 139- 136. Although ultimately the granting of relief on a doleance claim is a matter for the court's discretion, I see no reason to refuse relief to these Claimants. 139. It seems to me inevitable that the Department will have to pay the Claimants' costs of these proceedings, such costs to be assessed on the standard basis in default of agreement, but I will of course hear submissions should the Department disagree with this provisional indication. How much did the 'relief' granted by the Court ultimately amount to and how much did the Department have to pay for the Defendant's costs of the proceedings?

Data Tables (1)

Data Tables (reformatted)

Full Response Text

Freedom of Information Co-ordinator Corporate Services Directorate Thie Slieau Whallian, Foxdale Road, St John’s, Isle of Man, IM4 3AS Tel no (01624) 685854 Fax no (01624 685851 Email: defa@gov.im www.gov.im

Our ref: 2060125 1st November 2021

Dear ###

We write further to your request which was received on 29th October 2021 and which states:

"With reference to this Chancery Court case - QUINE & otr v DEFA Case Reference - Division Code CHP Case Reference - Year 2019 Case Reference - Number 83 Court HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ISLE OF MAN Division CIVIL - CHANCERY PROCEDURE Judgment Date 24 January 2020 The Judgment of His Honour Deemster Corlett Party One Iain David Quine Advocate Party One Richard Halsall (Bridson Halsall) Party Two Robert Michael Quine Advocate Party Two Richard Halsall (Bridson Halsall) Party Three Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture Advocate Party Three Keiron Murray (Attorney General's Chambers) which you can find here - https://www.judgments.im/content/J2641.htm In his Judgement Deemster Corlett stated in 136 and 139- 136. Although ultimately the granting of relief on a doleance claim is a matter for the court's discretion, I see no reason to refuse relief to these Claimants. 139. It seems to me inevitable that the Department will have to pay the Claimants' costs of these proceedings, such costs to be assessed on the standard basis in default of agreement, but I will of course hear submissions should the Department disagree with this provisional indication. How much did the 'relief' granted by the Court ultimately amount to and how much did the Department have to pay for the Defendant's costs of the proceedings?"

Our response to your request is as follows:

Certain legal costs relating to part of the proceedings have been claimed by the Claimants and agreed and paid in the sum of £11,000 plus VAT and disbursements (£473.00). Some further costs have yet to be subject to a detailed claim from the Claimants. Please quote the reference number 2060125 in any future communications.

Your right to request a review

If you are unhappy with this response to your freedom of information request, you may ask us to carry out an internal review of the response, by completing a complaint form and submitting it electronically or by delivery/post.

An electronic version of our complaint form can be found by going to our website at https://services.gov.im/freedom-of-information/Review . If you would like a paper version of our complaint form to be sent to you by post, please contact me and I will be happy to arrange for this. Your review request should explain why you are dissatisfied with this response, and should be made as soon as practicable. We will respond as soon as the review has been concluded. If you are not satisfied with the result of the review, you then have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner for a decision on; 1. Whether we have responded to your request for information in accordance with Part 2 of the Freedom of Information Act 2015; or 2. Whether we are justified in refusing to give you the information requested.
In response to an application for review, the Information Commissioner may, at any time, attempt to resolve a matter by negotiation, conciliation, mediation or another form of alternative dispute resolution and will have regard to any outcome of this in making any subsequent decision. More detailed information on your right to a review can be found on the Information Commissioner’s website at www.inforights.im. Should you have any queries concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Further information about freedom of information requests can be found at www.gov.im/foi. I will now close your request as of this date.

Yours sincerely