Neil Wilby Media

A senior paid council officer, described elsewhere on this website as ‘arguably the worst Borough Solicitor in the country’, has placed himself in the media spotlight, yet again.

Paul Entwistle (pictured above), also described, with ample justification, as ‘lazy, inept and ineffective’, also has other responsibilities as Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council‘s Head of Legal Services and statutory Monitoring Officer in which he routinely fails. 

Thankfully, after relentless pressure brought by Neil Wilby Media with exposé after exposé, the errant lawyer is finally set to leave the Council within the next few months (read more here).

In a recent case brought before the High Court, a long-standing dispute over council tax obligations has come under scrutiny. The case, involving Ms. Sharon Kofa and the local authority, delves into the intricacies of council tax legislation and enforcement procedures.

At its core lies a challenge to the validity of a Charging Order placed on Ms. Kofa’s property, stemming from unpaid council tax bills dating back to 2021.

Background of the Case

Ms. Kofa’s dispute with the council began in 2021 when she failed to pay council tax bills related to her property in Chadderton. Despite repeated reminder notices and legal proceedings initiated by the Council, the outstanding amounts continued to accumulate, leading to court involvement at various levels.

The case wound its way through multiple legal avenues, starting with summonses and Liability Orders issued by the Magistrates’ Court, followed by proceedings in the Manchester County Court, culminating in its current state at the High Court.

Ms. Kofa, represented by legal counsel, sought permission for judicial review, aiming to challenge the validity of the Charging Order placed on her property.

Legal Arguments and Procedural Hurdles

Ms. Kofa’s case rested on two principal arguments:

1. Validity of Liability Orders: Ms. Kofa contended that no court-issued liability orders had been produced, as required by law. She argued that regulations governing liability orders had been amended, and since 2003, courts no longer issue specified forms of liability orders. Despite her repeated requests for documentation, no satisfactory evidence of liability orders was presented.

2. Constitutional Challenge: Ms. Kofa raised broader constitutional concerns, questioning the legality of imposing council tax obligations without individual consent. She invoked legal principles dating back to the Ashby v White case of 1703, asserting that council tax legislation infringes upon fundamental common law rights. However, the court found these arguments lacking in legal merit and incompatible with established statutory frameworks.

Judicial Review and Alternative Remedies

The court examined whether Ms. Kofa had exhausted alternative remedies before seeking judicial review. It noted that Ms. Kofa had the opportunity to challenge the validity of Liability Orders through appeals or applications to set aside orders in the County Court. However, she failed to avail herself of these avenues, opting instead for judicial review proceedings.

Court’s Ruling and Observations

Ultimately, the court refused permission for judicial review, citing Ms. Kofa’s failure to utilise available alternative remedies. It emphasised that judicial review should not be used as a substitute for other legal processes, especially when statutory avenues for appeal or redress exist.

Furthermore, the court provided critical observations on the legal arguments presented by Ms. Kofa. It highlighted discrepancies in her interpretation of council tax legislation and underscored the importance of adherence to procedural requirements.

Costs and Appeal Rights

Finally, the court addressed costs, ordering Ms. Kofa to pay the council’s costs for acknowledgment of service and summary grounds. However, it refrained from ordering costs for the hearing, maintaining the default position in judicial review cases.

The Council, in a show of what could be interpreted as a petulance and/or vindictiveness invited the court to award costs against the claimant on the indemnity basis. Which would have represented a substantial financial penalty to Ms Kofa. The judge rejected that submission.

Ms. Kofa was reminded of her appeal rights and the timeline for filing an appeal, although the court expressed reservations about the likelihood of success in any such appeal.

Conclusion

The case exemplifies the complexities involved in council tax disputes and underscores the importance of procedural compliance and exhausting alternative remedies before seeking judicial intervention.

Whilst Ms. Kofa’s arguments raised significant legal questions, the court ultimately found them unpersuasive in the context of existing legislative frameworks and procedural norms.

In another landmark case, Oldham Council recently lost a High Court challenge brought over their rejection of a request for assistance from a homeless woman. Read the article in full here.

Follow Neil Wilby on Twitter (here) and Neil Wilby Media on Facebook (here) for signposts to any updates.

Page last updated: Wednesday 12th June, 2024 at 0845 hours

Thank you for reading and a polite request: If you feel this article is of value and in the public interest, and wish to make a contribution to the running costs of this website, it would be very much appreciated. Donations can made securely (and anonymously if required), via Buy Me A Coffee at this link or via PayPal at this link.

Corrections: Please let me know if there is a mistake in this article. I will endeavour to correct it as soon as possible.

Picture credit: 

Right of reply: If you are mentioned in this article and disagree with it, please let me have your comments. Provided your response is not defamatory it will be added to the article.

© Neil Wilby 2015-2024. Unauthorised use, or reproduction, of the material contained in this article, without permission from the author, is strictly prohibited. Extracts from, and links to, the article (or blog) may be used, provided that credit is given to Neil Wilby Media, with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.