A DISPUTE between two York neighbours over a blocked drain went all the way to the Court of Appeal and has led to legal bills of more than £300,000.

A Law Lord has criticised the huge costs which arose over the drainage problem at the back of the neighbours' two properties in New Walk Terrace, off Fishergate, which cost only £4,000 to repair.

Lord Justice Floyd said: "It is a regrettable feature of this case that the litigation continues only because of the enormous sums in costs which are at stake.

"The adjective 'disproportionate' is wholly inadequate to describe the combined expenditure on resolving the question of who pays a £4,000 bill."

He said the dispute involved John and Bernardine Van Dijk and their next door neighbour Terry Court, and their shared use of a common private drain.

The case went to York County Court in September 2013, when Mr Recorder Tim Kerr QC awarded damages of £4,227 plus interest to the Van Dijks in their action for 'nuisance' arising from the alleged unlawful interference with their use of the drain.

He said Mrs Court faced a costs bill from other parties of some £220,000, while she herself had expended 'very large sums' on her own costs of some £89,000.

Mrs Court was appealing at the Court of Appeal against the Recorder's decision, and Lord Justice Lloyd and Lord Justice Sales granted her appeal.

Lord Justice Lloyd said that in 2000, Mrs Court had discovered that the drain was cracked and leaking and employed a builder to repair it. During that work, he capped off the drain.

In 2006, she noticed water flowing out of the top of her gully in the rear yard and contacted City of York Council, whose investigations proved inconclusive.

"In November 2006, Mr Van Dijk suggested to Mrs Court that they should share the costs of investigating and curing the drainage problem, but Mrs Court declined this offer, saying that she had already incurred costs on her side with the council investigation," he said.

In 2007, the council carried out work as private drainage contractors and the following night the Van Dijks noticed flooding in their rear yard and they paid for remedial work, the cost of which formed the subject of their claim.

Mr Recorder Kerr agreed the flooding was caused by Mrs Court's contractor's work and so she was responsible for the bill.

In her appeal, Mrs Court argued the Van Dijks had only claimed for damages based on work done in 2007 and not 2000, and the Court of Appeal accepted her case.

Lord Justice Floyd said: "When it emerged that the private drain had, since 2000, been blocked, the pleaded factual case against Mrs Court, based on obstruction of the drain by the 2007 works, had to fail."

Mrs Court and Mr Van Dijk both declined to comment yesterday.