Long-running West Norfolk Council legal battle with one of its councillors sees lawyers now agree to refund fees
Lawyers working for West Norfolk Council have agreed to refund their fees after a barrister’s error cost them thousands of pounds through losing a High Court case.
West Norfolk Council (WNC) will receive the compensation following a legal battle against one of its own councillors, Simon Nash.
The mistake left the authority out of pocket after a judge ruled against its attempts to claim back costs of an earlier court hearing brought by the councillor.
It is the latest twist in an extraordinary row between Mr Nash and his own authority that has lasted nearly a decade and has cost the borough council at least £14,000 in legal fees.
CONDUCT COMMOTION
The legal battle was sparked by a standards hearing into Mr Nash’s conduct, which he claimed breached his human rights.
Mr Nash, an independent representing Setchey, took WNC to the High Court, believing his right to a fair trial was breached during the standards hearing in January last year.
He was found to have broken codes of conduct over a series of emails to officers in which he accused officials of “corruption” and “acting like a dictatorship” – complaints he says were made acting as a “whistleblower” to highlight issues with the authority’s processes.
The accusations related to an ongoing feud with the authority over the treatment of his mechanics’ business before he was elected as a councillor.
The saga eventually led to his emails being blocked and he was dubbed a ‘persistent complainer’ by officials.
Mr Nash called for a judicial review of the hearing, arguing it broke his right to fair trial as he was refused a ‘McKenzie friend’ – a legal term for an individual who can provide moral support during disciplinary proceedings.
A judge dismissed the request for a review, finding his rights had not been breached, ordering him to pay £4,250 to cover WNC’s legal fees.
However, at a subsequent appeal hearing, a second judge found that the council’s lawyers “misled” the court by using incorrect evidence to support their claim.
‘WRONG INFORMATION’
A council report now claims Mr Nash provided the wrong information to the judge related to the council’s guidance for standards hearings.
The document, written by the council’s monitoring officer, said: “Unfortunately, the council’s barrister in the hearing mistakenly conceded on both of these points.
“The council has since been offered a fee reduction by its external lawyers to compensate for the cancellation of the costs award.”
Following the High Court battle, WNC reviewed its complaints process and drew up new policies.
Officials also conducted an investigation into the saga that led to the High Court battle, concluding that the council did nothing wrong.
At a standards committee hearing this week, members discussed the changes, with Mr Nash also present.
However, his attempts to debate the merits of the report were quickly shut down.
An intervention by WNC’s deputy leader Simon Ring put a halt to him speaking, claiming he had an interest in the matter and should therefore “not be speaking”.
Later in the meeting, Mr Ring said he hoped the council could “move on” from the debacle.
He added: “It would be nice to see apologies are made, but I doubt they will be.”
Mr Nash, following the meeting, continues to be frustrated at how the council handled his standards hearing and disputes some of the report’s findings.
He said: “I did not provide the incorrect guidance to the court. I provided both the original and amended versions.”
He believes the report should have been completed by an independent person as the officers who compiled it were involved in the hearing process to avoid a potential conflict of interest.
