City council chiefs have not objected to a cost limiting bid by Kingsford campaigners that could potentially cost the taxpayer.
The group fighting to block Aberdeen’s new stadium are seeking a legal judgement that will limit their costs should they lose.
It is understood Aberdeen City Council chose not to oppose the grant of a special order to Kingsford Stadium objectors, which would potentially save them cash if their court case against the development fails.
The No Kingsford Stadium (NKS) group is battling to halt the £50 million new stadium and training facilities scheme for Aberdeen Football Club between Westhill and Kingswells.
Last night a leading legal expert said taxpayers may be forced to pick up the bill for legal costs no matter the outcome of court proceedings.
The pressure group has raised fears of over development of the area, with increased traffic and the potential for rowdy football supporters in the usually quiet city suburb.
And that has seen members launched legal action against the council’s decision to grant planning permission.
BLACK FRIDAY OFFER: Two years of unlimited access to The P&J Digital — at better than half price!
The project was approved by Aberdeen City Council in January, despite neighbouring Aberdeenshire Council voting against it in an advisory capacity.
NKS believes the city council has gone against its own policies of developing on green belt land – a position that is likely to form the basis of its judicial review.
It is understood the group applied for a special protective expenses order – which would potentially limit their losses if their case fails.
An insider has said the council has not opposed this move, meaning they will pay their own way in the case.
Had the order not been granted the group could have been forced to pay the council’s legal bill should they lose.
It is understood that it is fairly standard for a body such as the city council not to oppose such an order when facing a smaller scale community group like NKS.
Previous cases have seen the financial burden assumed by groups limited to as little as £5,000.
Aberdeen bosses want the first phase to be complete by next autumn and have vowed to simply apply for permission again if the council decision is overturned.
Scott Milne of Thorntons Solicitors said judicial reviews often prove to be very costly.
He said: “Someone will ultimately have to pay for the council’s legal representation and the cost will be borne ultimately by the ratepayers of Aberdeen.
“These things are notoriously expensive and in planning matters they can grow arms and legs as they are usually based on complex arguments.”
An Aberdeen City Council spokeswoman said: “It is not appropriate to comment on an ongoing legal matter.”
NKS also declined to comment.
A procedural hearing will be held on December 19. The substantive hearing will start on January 29.
A substantive hearing to decide the future of Aberdeen FC’s new £50 million stadium will be held early next year.
Work has already started on the expansive development after city councillors gave it their backing in January.
Before approval was granted, the No Kingsford Stadium (NKS) group was formed amid fears of increased traffic and noise in the usually quiet suburb.
NKS believes the city council “failed in its duty” to properly determine the application and launched a judicial review which will be considered at the Court of Session.
A procedural hearing will be held on December 19 before the substantive hearing between January 29 and 31.
The club have previously criticised the move, saying they will simply reapply for permission.
As well as the new stadium to replace Pittodrie, Aberdeen FC also plans to build new training and community sports facilities, a heritage museum and dedicated facilities for the Aberdeen FC Community Trust.
The Dons have long said they must leave their historic beachfront home due to escalating costs associated with maintaining the ageing stadium, to keep the team at its current standing and attract quality players to the north-east.
