A judge has ordered the council to pay a developer who ripped green tiles off a Brighton pub his costs after it decided to halt a prosecution.
Brighton and Hove City Council withdrew its case after Judge Mark van der Zwart asked it to review its decision to prosecute Charlie Southall over his failure to replace tiles taken off the Montreal Arms in March 2022.
Southall applied to Lewes Crown Court for the council to refund him his expenses – and this month, Judge van der Zwart agreed.
In the ruling, he said it was clear Southall had sought repeatedly to talk to the council about how best to put the tiles back on, given the state of the bungaroosh walls underneath.
He said: “I find the correspondence shows a developer keen to engage with the council to find the best solution to the state of the building, to preserve it’s character while enabling it to function again in the 21st century, a developer keen to comply with rather than ignore the statutory framework to do so, a developer anxious to comply with the enforcement notice but equally anxious to explain why compliance was impractical.
“In addition, he complains to BHCC of the community hostility being directed toward himself and his family, made worse by what BHCC were to admit (and I find no reason to doubt) was an accidental publication of Mr Southall’s home address.”
The judgement also refers to a report Southall submitted in 2023 by Couch Consulting Engineers which detailed the “advanced deterioration” of the building, which he says should have caused the council to withdraw the enforcement notice.
He said: “I have sought repeatedly, an explanation from BHCC for why that decision [to prosecute] was taken in view of what has been set out above about the impracticality of complying with the enforcement notice but none has been given.”
He quoted emails from Sian Berry MP to the planning department in September 2024, in which she said it felt appropriate for the council to push Southall to adhere to the enforcement notice in the absence of engagement and a commitment to undertake the work, noting these were sent four months after planning permission had been given to refurb the pub.
The ruling also quotes an email from ward councillor Tim Rowkins sent the following week: “‘The feeling in the community’ was that Mr Southall had ‘acted in bad faith from the outset’, the removal of tiles was ‘an act of vandalism on a historic and valued building’, the passing of the time limit for the enforcement notice ‘without consequence’ was ‘not palatable to residents’ who would see the ‘villain getting away with it’.
“Councillor Rowkins expressed the belief that Mr Southall would not begin the repairs in a timely fashion without ‘us’ (I presume he meant the council) ‘taking a very firm approach’.
“In my judgement, this email amounts to an elected council member having determined together with his constituents, that the defendant was a vandal and a villain who should be prosecuted.
“In my judgement, it was a blatant attempt to force a prosecutorial decision for political reasons. Sadly, it seems to have worked.”
Councillor Rowkins announced the prosecution was starting in a Facebook post the following May.
Southall requested £20,268.60 in costs, which consisted of £11,475.60 in payments to legal advisors, expert witnesses and admin support, plus rail fares, and £8,797 for his own time as a litigant in person.
What has been done by the owner is clearly wrong. However, the mismanagement of local council officials and politicians is incompetent beyond belief. Those that are still in Council positions should pay the ‘penalty’ and be prohibited from any further costly mistakes.
If you actually read the full findings you will understand that the owner was in his rights to carry out the works. Unfortunately people like the journo that wrote the article and people like benny boy on here pictured him to be some vandal. If you look back all though this I said the truth will come out, it’s ashame that a few people didn’t believe me