Regina v Gravesend Magistrates Court ex parte Baker: Admn 16 Apr 1997

The defendant appealed a refusal of legal aid. She wished to establish that her drink had been spiked, and thus to establish special reasons for not being disqualified for driving with excess alcohol.
Held: Expert evidence would assist the magistrates in deciding the matter. That would not be available without expert evidence, and therefore legal aid was necessary.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mccowan -And- Mr Justice Popplewell

Citations:

[1997] EWHC Admin 373

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v O’Connor and Chapman and Others 1991
The court looked at the elements needed to be established to support a defence to a charge of driving with excess alcohol on the basis that the defendant’s drinks had been spiked: ‘On the authorities, it is now clearly established that the matters . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Vincent QBD 1992
(Year?) ‘From the authorities the following principles can be established. Firstly, it is for the defendant on the balance of probability to establish that his drink had been laced unknown to him. Secondly, it is very rarely that a court will be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Magistrates, Legal Aid

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137318

Regina (Gunn) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Regina (Kelly) v Same Regina (Zahid Khan) v Same: CA 14 Jun 2001

The new Regulations and court rules expressly reserved to a costs judge the decision about whether a costs order should be made against the Legal Services Commission. The former practice of the trial judge making this decision must no longer apply. The new rules did not operate to remove the power of the court to make similar costs orders in favour of public bodies. The test of whether such an order should be made remained whether it was just and equitable to do so. The court summarised the Cost Protection Regulations.
Lord Phillips MR said: ‘The new regulations introduce a two-stage process in relation to the recovery of costs in cases to which s 11(1) of the 1999 Act applies. The procedure to be followed is primarily to be derived from the costs regulations. The scheme is as follows.
Stage 1
The first stage involves the court dealing with the substance of the dispute, which we shall call the trial court. The role of the trial court is as follows. (i) To decide whether to make an order for costs against a funded litigant (the client) (reg 9(1)). (ii) To decide whether it is in a position to specify the amount, if any, to be paid by the client (reg 9(2)). (iii) To make a costs order against the client which either (a) specifies the amount, if any, to be paid by the client and states the amount of the full costs, or (b) does not specify the amount to be paid by the client (reg 9(3) and (4)). The order is described in the regulations as a s 11(1) costs order and is defined in both sets of regulations as a ‘costs order against a client where cost protection applies’. ‘Cost protection’ means ‘the limit set on costs awarded against a client set out in s 11(1) of the Act’. (iv) Where the order does not specify the amount to be paid by the client, to make, if it sees fit, findings of fact, as to the parties’ conduct in the proceedings or otherwise, relevant to the determination of the amount (reg 9(6)).
Stage 2
Stage 2 consists of the procedure to be followed to ascertain the amount of costs to be paid by the client against whom the trial court has made an order that does not specify the amount. Stage 2 also includes the procedure for determining whether an order for costs should be made against the Commission (reg 9(5)). The regulations in relation to Stage 2 allocate certain functions to ‘the Court’. Regulation 10(10) provides that in relation to proceedings in the Court of Appeal, High Court or county court the court’s functions ‘may be exercised’ by a costs judge or a district judge. While it is arguable that the High Court and the Court of Appeal also enjoy jurisdiction to exercise these functions, we think it plain that the scheme does not envisage that they should do so.
Regulation 2 provides that ‘Costs Judge’ has the same meaning as in the CPR. CPR 43.2(1)(b) provides that ‘Costs Judge’ means a taxing master of the Supreme Court.
The procedure under Stage 2 is as follows. (i) The party in whose favour the costs order has been made (the receiving party) may, within three months of the making of the costs order, request a hearing to determine the costs payable to him (reg 10(2)). (ii) The receiving party may, at the same time, seek a costs order against the Commission. (reg 10(3)(c)). We wish to take this opportunity to emphasise a fact that we understand is not generally appreciated. The three-month time limit for seeking an order against the Commission is mandatory-there is no power to extend it. (iii) The receiving party must, when making the request, file with the court and serve on the client and the regional director of the Commission (if an order is sought against the Commission): (a) a bill of costs; (b) a statement of resources; and (c) a written notice that a costs order is sought against the Commission (reg 10(3) and (4)). (iv) The client must file a statement of resources and serve this on the receiving party and the regional director (where a claim is made on the Commission) (reg 10(6)). (v) The court sets a date for the hearing (reg 10(9)). (vi) The court conducts the hearing, assesses the costs (if any) to be paid by the client and, where appropriate, makes a costs order against the Commission.
The costs regulations do not, in fact, expressly provide that the costs judge shall carry out the functions set out under (vi) above, but it is plainly implicit that he should. That this is part of his role is confirmed by the explicit provisions of the cost protection regulations.
The cost protection regulations set out the circumstances in which the costs judge or district judge may make a costs order against the Commission. Regulation 5(3) makes it plain that it is for the costs judge or district judge to be satisfied that it is just and equitable that provision for the costs should be made out of public funds and, in respect of proceedings at first instance, that the non-funded party will suffer severe financial hardship unless the order is made. In considering these matters the costs judge or district judge is expressly required to have regard to the resources of the non-funded party and of his partner – reg 5(6).
We have set out the new regulatory scheme in detail because we have concluded that it is not compatible with the current practices of the trial court. The function of deciding whether or not a costs order can and should be made against the Commission is now expressly assigned to the costs judge or district judge. He cannot make such an order unless and until the prescribed formalities have been completed. It is not open to the trial court to rule that it is just and equitable to make the order or to direct that the order is to be made before the prescribed formalities have been completed. Regulation 9(6) of the costs regulations permits the trial court, when making a costs order, to make findings of fact relevant to the determination of the amount to be paid by the client. We consider that it must also be open to the trial court to make any findings in relation to the conduct of the parties or facts that have emerged in the course of the proceedings that have relevance to the task to be performed by the costs judge or district judge. Beyond this the trial court should not go. It follows that, in the cases before us, this court should not have usurped the function of the costs judge-in these cases the taxing master-in deciding that it was just and equitable to make a costs order against the Commission and to direct that such an order be made. This practice must no longer be followed, whether in the county court, the High Court or the Court of Appeal.

Judges:

Lord Phillips MR, Pill and Keene LJJ

Citations:

Times 20-Jun-2001, Gazette 05-Jul-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 891, [2001] 1 WLR 1634, [2001] CP Rep 107, [2001] 3 All ER 481, [2001] 2 Costs LR 263

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Community Legal Services (Costs) Regulations 2000 (SI 2000 No 441)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoRegina v Home Secretary ex parte Gunn CA 2000
A challenge under article 5 to decisions about a prisoner’s treatment were misconceived in the context of the Secretary of State’s refusal to transfer a prisoner to open conditions with a view to improving his prospects of release: ‘[Article 5(4)] . .

Cited by:

CitedD and D W v Portsmouth Hospital NHS; in re W (A Child) CA 3-May-2006
The claimants had sought court orders against the hospital to secure continuing life-supporting treatment for their daughter who had been born very severely disabled. The Trust now sought their costs from the various actions.
Held: The parents . .
CitedFloyd and Another v Legal Services Commission QBD 28-Apr-2010
The claimant had succeeded in an action against her legally aided opponent, but then delayed in making her claim for costs against the respondent. The costs judge said that the CPR did not apply, and that he had no discretion to extend the time . .
CitedLeeds City Council v Price and Others QBD 4-Apr-2011
The council had successfully defended a case brought by the defendant under legal aid. The parties now disputed whether it could recover the costs from the Legal Service Commission. The LSC answered that it had not been given proper notice of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136149

Toth, Regina (on the Application of) v Legal Services Commission: Admn 17 Jan 2002

The applicant sought a judicial review of the Commission’s refusal of his appeal against the refusal to remove a restriction on his legal aid certificate. The request had been refused on the merits after applying a cost benefit analysis, and he challenged the fairness of the procedure adopted on his appeal. He said that a substantial part of the costs already incurred had been so incurred because of the failings of his first solicitors.
Held: The Commission had assessed the likely cost of the case, and made a decision within their discretion. At the appeal hearing he had not been given warning of the nature of the questions he would be asked to answer. The court held he could be expected to have provided all the information in his possession, and the procedure had not been unfair. The cost/benefit test was not ultra vires, and the application failed.

Judges:

Mr Justice Hooper

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 5 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 15(3)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.168019

Regina v Legal Aid Board No 15 Area (Merseyside) ex parte Stephen Richard Paul Eccleston: Admn 3 Apr 1998

An assisted person who needed funds in order to travel to a medical examination should have his expenses re-imbursed by the Legal Aid Board. What was recoverable on taxation inter partes was not the correct test and did not follow the Regulation wording.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Oct-1998, [1998] 1 WLR 1279, [1998] EWHC Admin 396

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.138517

Stein v Blake: ChD 31 Oct 2000

When a Legal Aid certificate was withdrawn, leading to an opposing party suffering abortive costs in continuing the action, it was not a duty of the Legal Services Commission to inform the opposing side. They would have no access to arrangements made by the formerly assisted person for continuing the action or otherwise, and the duty must fall on the solicitor appointed to act.

Citations:

Times 31-Oct-2000, Gazette 09-Nov-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoStein v Blake CA 13-May-1993
The plaintiff argued that: ‘Nothing in the wording of section 323 changes the nature of set-off as it operates between solvent parties; it merely widens the categories of claim capable of being, and which must be, set off.’
Held: The decision . .
See AlsoStein v Blake HL 18-May-1995
Where A and B each have claims against each other and A is insolvent, the common amount is set off, and the net difference remains as a debt due.
Hoffmann L said: ‘It is a matter of common occurrence for an individual to become insolvent while . .
See AlsoStein v Blake and others CA 13-Oct-1997
The defendants challenged leave to appeal given to the plaintiff against dismissal of his claim following the Prudential Assurance case.
Held: The issue was whether the plaintiff can recover the loss which he has allegedly sustained by reason . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Legal Professions

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89540

Stacey v Player and Another: ChD 23 Feb 2001

A party was legally aided in proceedings. A third party offered to pay his costs in interlocutory proceedings. He was successful, and the losing party appealed an order to pay his costs. He succeeded. Whilst he was legally aided, his solicitors could only receive payment from the Legal Services Commission, and the fact that someone else might have paid did not allow an order against the third party. Such an order would leave the solicitors receiving payment other than from the LSC.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Mar-2001, Times 23-Feb-2001

Statutes:

Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 64

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89479

Sheffield City Council v V; Legal Services Commission intervening: FD 23 Jun 2006

The court set out the criteria to be used when ordering payment by the council of the costs of a residential assessment ordered during care proceedings.

Citations:

Times 25-Aug-2006

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 38(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Local Government, Legal Aid

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.244693

Arbitrators’ Institute of New Zealand Inc v Legal Services Board: 1995

(New Zealand) A dispute had been referred to arbitration, and the question was whether a private arbitrator was a ‘judicial authority’.
Held: In their natural and ordinary meaning those words referred to a person or body: ‘ . . having power to judge a matter before it, which power is derived from the state.’ After a lengthy examination of the statutory context and its legislative history, the judge concluded that a private arbitrator, whose authority derived from the consent of the parties and not from the state, was not a ‘judicial authority’ within the meaning of the subparagraph.

Citations:

[1995] 2 NZLR 202

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPauline Eunice Tangiora v Wellington District Legal Services Committee PC 4-Oct-1999
PC (New Zealand) The appellants claimed that their treatment by the respondent infringed their human rights as guaranteed by the respondents signing the Convenant. They wanted to apply to the International . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.199553

Regina v Chester and North Wales Legal Aid Area Office Ex Parte Floods of Queensbury Ltd: QBD 7 Nov 1997

It was possible for a body to apply for legal aid but only if it was genuinely acting in a fiduciary capacity as trustee, not mere contractual representative.

Citations:

Times 07-Nov-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 883

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1974 2(10), Legal Aid Act 1988 2(10)

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Chester and North Wales Legal Aid Area Office (No 12) ex parte Floods of Queensferry Limited CA 18-Dec-1997
A company was not entitled to legal aid unless it was clearly acting in a fiduciary capacity; that the assignment of an action is invalid is insufficient to warrant a grant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Company

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.86343

Norglen Ltd (In Liquidation) v Reeds Rains Prudential Ltd and Others; Circuit Systems Ltd (In Liquidation) and Another v Zuken-Redac: HL 1 Dec 1997

An assignment of a cause of action by a company in liquidation was valid, even though the dominant purpose was to avoid having to give security for costs, and to get legal aid. In dismissing the argument that the transactions were a device to defeat the purpose of statutory provisions: ‘It is not that the statute has a penumbral spirit which strikes down devices or stratagems designed to avoid its terms or exploit its loopholes. There is no need for such spooky jurisprudence.’

Judges:

Lord Hoffman, Lord Browne Wilkinson, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Nolan, Lord Clyde

Citations:

Gazette 17-Dec-1997, Times 01-Dec-1997, Gazette 18-Feb-1998, [1997] 3 WLR 1177, [1997] UKHL 51

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 17(1) 34

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromNorglen Ltd (In Liquidation) v Reeds Rains Prudential Ltd and Others; Etc CA 6-Dec-1995
An assignment of a cause of action in order to be eligible to apply for Legal Aid is not against public policy. An assignment of a cause of action was not invalid solely on the ground that its purpose was to enable the action to be prosecuted on . .
CitedGuy v Churchill 1888
There could be no objection to an assignment by the trustee in bankruptyc of a cause of action in return for a share of the proceeds, which ‘apart from the bankruptcy law . . is plainly void for champerty.’ . .
CitedSeear v Lawson CA 1880
‘If the trustee gets a right of action, why is he not to realise it? The proper office of the trustee is to realise the property for the sake of distributing the proceeds among the creditors. Why should we hold as a matter of policy that it is . .
Appeal fromCircuit Systems Ltd (In Liquidation) and Another v Zuken Redac (Uk) Ltd CA 5-Apr-1996
The assignment of a debt by a company in liquidation to a significant shareholder, in order to allow him to make an application for legal aid, and to avoid having to give security for costs and to allow the action to proceed was not unlawful, but . .
Wrongly decidedAdvanced Technology Structures Ltd v Cray Valley Products Ltd CA 1993
An assignment of the cause of action should not be recognised or given effect because it was a ‘sham’.
Hirst LJ said that the assignment was: ‘a mere stratagem or device to enable the company to carry on the proceedings, with the support of Mr. . .
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Duke of Westminster HL 7-May-1935
The Duke’s gardener was paid weekly, but to reduce tax, his solicitors drew up a deed in which it was said that the earnings were not really wages, but were an annual payment payable by weekly instalments.
Held: To find out what the true . .
CitedCommissioners of Inland Revenue v McGuckian HL 21-May-1997
Steps which had been inserted into a commercial transaction, but which had no purpose other than the saving of tax are to be disregarded when assessing the tax effect of the scheme. The modern approach to statutory construction is to have regard to . .
CitedFurniss (Inspector of Taxes) v Dawson HL 9-Feb-1983
The transfer of shares to a subsidiary as part of a planned scheme immediately to transfer them to an outside purchaser was regarded as a taxable disposition to the outside purchaser rather than an exempt transfer to a group company. In defined . .
CitedSnook v London and West Riding Investments Ltd CA 1967
Sham requires common intent to create other result
The court considered a claim by a hire-purchase company for the return of a vehicle. The bailee said the agreement was a sham.
Held: The word ‘sham’ should only be used to describe an act or document where the parties have a common intention . .
CitedWallersteiner v Moir (No 2) CA 1975
The court was asked whether Moir would be entitled to legal aid to bring a derivative action on behalf of a company against its majority shareholder.
Held: A minority shareholder bringing a derivative action on behalf of a company could obtain . .
CitedRegina v The Law Society, Ex parte Nicholson 22-Feb-1985
A legal aid committee could not refuse legal aid under this provision solely on the ground that the applicant had acquired the cause of action by assignment from an insolvent company, without having regard to the other circumstances of the case. . .
CitedRamsey v Hartley CA 1977
The court considered the sale of a cause of action by the trustee in bankruptcy: ‘Now, the sale of a cause of action by a trustee can only be effected by an assignment. It vests in the trustee in the first place because it is deemed to have been . .
CitedFreightex Ltd v International Express Co Ltd CA 15-Apr-1980
Dunn L.J: ‘I do not think that a liquidator or an assignee from a liquidator should be put on terms either by way of security for costs or otherwise as a condition of enforcing an assigned claim.’ the other court members thought it was inappropriate . .
CitedEurocross Sales Ltd and Another v Cornhill Insurance Plc CA 5-Sep-1995
The company was in financial difficulties but not yet in liquidation. It sold its assets, including a claim against the defendant insurance company, to its principal shareholder Mr. Sood. The company’s action against the defendant was proceeding in . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Braintree District Council ex parte Halls Admn 2-Jul-1999
Where a local authority had sold a property to a tenant, and the tenant later came back to request the release from one of the covenants given on the sale, the council was free to charge an appropriate sum for that release. It was not a covenant . .
CitedHendry v Chartsearch Ltd CA 16-Sep-1998
An assignment of the benefit of a contract without the consent of the contractor and in breach of contract was effective between assignor and assignee but not as against the original contract other party.
The modern practice for the allowing of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.84325

Levy v Legal Services Commission (Formerly the Legal Aid Board): CA 10 Nov 2000

A costs order made in the course of family proceedings had the same protection against enforcement through insolvency proceedings as do other family orders. No provable bankruptcy debt arose because it was made under an order in family proceedings. There were no special circumstances to require the court to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction to found a bankruptcy petition on a non-provable debt. A party served with a statutory demand based upon a non-provable debt has the right to have the demand set aside, since there was no realistic prospect of a bankruptcy order following.

Citations:

Gazette 30-Nov-2000, Times 01-Dec-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 285

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Insolvency Rules 1986/1925 12.3(2)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insolvency, Family, Legal Aid

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.83039

Faulkner v United Kingdom: ECHR 30 Nov 1999

The Island of Guernsey had failed in its duty to introduce a system of legal aid to provide legal representation to those unable to afford it. An amicable settlement was reached under which Guernsey undertook to introduce such a system. A system which had provided limited voluntary assistance in criminal cases, but no assistance in civil cases was inadequate. He had been denied both the right to a fair trial and the right to an effective remedy.

Citations:

Times 11-Jan-2000, 30308/96, [1999] ECHR 137

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 6, 13

Legal Aid, Human Rights

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80481

E v Legal Aid Board, Ex P W et Al (Minors): QBD 25 Nov 1999

The legal aid board could refuse to grant legal aid to children involved in proceedings to refuse contact to a parent, because the regulations which applied were sufficiently widely drawn to allow a discretion to the local authority to pay the costs. In such circumstances it was not unreasonable for legal aid to be refused.

Citations:

Times 25-Nov-1999

Statutes:

Guardians ad Litem Reporting Officers (Panels) Regulations 1991 (1991 No 205) 9, Children Act 1989 41(9), Family Proceedings Rules 1991 (1991 No 1247) 4.23

Legal Aid, Children, Local Government

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80202

Drummond and Co v Lamb and Others; Drummond and Co, WS v Scottish Legal Aid Board: HL 29 Apr 1992

The cost of excess work carried out under the green form scheme, was not recoverable despite the LAB’s subsequent approval of the action.

Citations:

Gazette 29-Apr-1992, [1992] UKHL 13, 1992 SC (HL) 1, [1992] 1 WLR 163, 1992 SLT 337

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986 10

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Legal Aid

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80137

Deg-Deutsche Investitions Und Entwicklungsgesellshaft Mbh v Koshy and Others: CA 20 Feb 2001

The effect of revocation of a party’s emergency civil legal aid certificate was that he was to be deemed never to have been an assisted person. Accordingly where two costs orders had been made in interlocutory proceedings, and the defendant had been protected from an order for costs because of the legal aid certificate, it was open to a judge to revisit those costs orders after revocation and to consider substituting orders which could not have been made when he was legally aided. The provisions in this case survived some of the repeals under the new legislation.

Citations:

Times 20-Feb-2001, Gazette 01-Mar-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1228

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988, Access to Justice Act 1999, Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNewgate Stud Company, Newgate Stud Farm Llc v Penfold, Penfold Bloodstock Limited ChD 21-Dec-2004
The claimants sought damages from the defendant. He had been employed to manage their horse-racing activities, and it was alleged that he had made secret profits. The defendant denied any dishonesty, saying all matters were known to the deceased . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79885

Boner v United Kingdom (30/2993/425/504), Maxwell v Same: ECHR 1 Nov 1994

The refusal of Legal Aid for appeal for long term prisoners was breach of Human Rights Convention.
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-3-c; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

Times 01-Nov-1994, 18711/91, [1994] ECHR 36

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Legal Aid, Human Rights, Prisons

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78480

Benham v United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Feb 1995

Legal Aid was wrongfully refused where a tax or fine defaulter was liable to imprisonment, and the lack of a proper means enquiry, made imprisonment of poll tax defaulter unlawful. A poll tax defaulter had been wrongly committed to prison by magistrates. The question was whether or not they had acted in excess of jurisdiction. If they had not, the detention was lawful under Article 5 (1) (b). English law distinguished between acts of a Magistrates court which were within its jurisdiction and those which were in excess of jurisdiction. The former were valid and effective unless or until they were overturned by a superior court, whereas the latter were null and void from the outset. The test for deciding whether or not magistrates acted within their jurisdiction was that laid down by the House of Lords in McC v Mullan. The third limb of that test was relevant here, namely that magistrates exceeded their jurisdiction when they made an order which had no foundation in law because of a failure to observe a statutory condition precedent.’ The proceedings for non-payment of the community charge were criminal: ‘the law concerning liability to pay the community charge and the procedure upon non-payment was of general application to all citizens, and that the proceedings in question were brought by a public authority under statutory powers of enforcement. In addition, the proceedings had some punitive elements. For example, the magistrates could only exercise their power of committal to prison on a finding of wilful refusal to pay or of culpable neglect. Finally, it is to be recalled that the applicant faced a relatively severe maximum penalty of three months’ imprisonment, and was in fact ordered to be detained for 30 days. Having regard to these factors, the Court concludes that B was ‘charged with a criminal offence’ for the purposes of Article 6(1) and (3). Accordingly, these two paragraphs of Article 6 are applicable.’

Citations:

Times 24-Jun-1996, Independent 08-Feb-1995, 19380/92, [1996] ECHR 22, [1996] 22 EHRR 293

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 6.3

Citing:

CitedMcC v Mullan; In re McC (A Minor) HL 1984
A statutory condition precluded magistrates from making the order they did unless a juvenile offender who was not legally represented had been refused legal aid, or had been informed of his right to apply for it but had refused or neglected to do . .

Cited by:

CitedMotorola Credit Corporation v Uzan and others (No 2) CA 12-Jun-2003
World-wide freezing orders had been made under the 1982 Act. The defendants were members of a Turkish family with substantial business interests in the telecommunications industry. In breach of orders made in the US some defendants had sought to . .
CitedHooper v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Nov-2004
The defendant had appeared in court on a charge of assault. The magistrate considered that he might be unruly and withoutmore bound him over to keep the peace. In the absence of any surety, he was committed to custody.
Held: The proceedings . .
CitedRegina v Parole Board ex parte Smith, Regina v Parole Board ex parte West (Conjoined Appeals) HL 27-Jan-2005
Each defendant challenged the way he had been treated on revocation of his parole licence, saying he should have been given the opportunity to make oral representations.
Held: The prisoners’ appeals were allowed.
Lord Bingham stated: . .
CitedGreenfield, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
The appellant had been charged with and disciplined for a prison offence. He was refused legal assistance at his hearing, and it was accepted that the proceedings involved the determination of a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6 of the . .
CitedRegina (McCann and Others) v Manchester Crown Court CA 9-Mar-2001
Proceedings applying for an anti-social behaviour order, were properly civil proceedings, with civil standards of evidence, and the Human Rights Act provisions relating to criminal proceedings, were not applicable either. The section included acts . .
CitedClingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others HL 17-Oct-2002
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made.
Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards . .
CitedBarnes (As Former Court Appointed Receiver) v The Eastenders Group and Another SC 8-May-2014
Costs of Wrongly Appointed Receiver
‘The contest in this case is about who should bear the costs and expenses of a receiver appointed under an order which ought not to have been made. The appellant, who is a former partner in a well known firm of accountants, was appointed to act as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Human Rights, Rating, Magistrates

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78332

Advanced Technology Structures Ltd v Cray Technology Ltd: CA 22 Feb 1993

There should be no legal aid for a company’s nominee to bring what were, in effect, company proceedings. Parliament had deliberately excluded such assistance, and it should not be circumvented by the company assigning its rights in action to a nominee.

Citations:

Ind Summary 22-Feb-1993

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Company

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77658

General Accident Car and Life Assurance Corporation Ltd v Foster: CA 1972

The court considered the use of the word ‘proceedings’ in the 1964 Act: ‘The first point is: what are the ‘proceedings’? Are they the proceedings from beginning to end – from the very first time when legal aid was granted? I think not. The only ‘proceedings’ with which we are concerned is the interlocutory appeal to this court, which we heard on 19 January 1971′ (Lord Denning MR)

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1972] 3 All ER 877

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1964

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMasterman-Lister v Brutton and Co and Another (2) CA 16-Jan-2003
The claimant had been funded for a personal injury claim under legal aid. He appealed against a decision that he was not a ‘patient’ and that he had been fully capable of managing and administering his affairs for many years. He lost. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.241422

Advanced Technology Structures Ltd v Cray Valley Products Ltd: CA 1993

An assignment of the cause of action should not be recognised or given effect because it was a ‘sham’.
Hirst LJ said that the assignment was: ‘a mere stratagem or device to enable the company to carry on the proceedings, with the support of Mr. Pratt’s [the assignee] legal aid, which manifestly neither they nor he could afford to do otherwise. . . The sole purpose of the assignment was therefore to tap the resources of the legal aid fund, which are available to Mr. Pratt only because of his own impecuniosity.’ To give effect to the assignment would conflict with ‘the underlying policy of the Act,’ which was that ‘legal aid should not be available to corporate plaintiffs.’
Leggatt LJ said: ‘When Parliament decided that legal aid should not be available to corporations, it cannot have been its intention that a corporation should be able to nominate an employee, to whom it has assigned a right of action, to conduct the litigation on its behalf with the assistance of legal aid for which he was eligible.’

Judges:

Hirst LJ, Leggatt LJ, Glidewell LJ

Citations:

[1993] BCLC 723

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

DistinguishedNorglen Ltd (In Liquidation) v Reeds Rains Prudential Ltd and Others; Etc CA 6-Dec-1995
An assignment of a cause of action in order to be eligible to apply for Legal Aid is not against public policy. An assignment of a cause of action was not invalid solely on the ground that its purpose was to enable the action to be prosecuted on . .
Wrongly decidedNorglen Ltd (In Liquidation) v Reeds Rains Prudential Ltd and Others; Circuit Systems Ltd (In Liquidation) and Another v Zuken-Redac HL 1-Dec-1997
An assignment of a cause of action by a company in liquidation was valid, even though the dominant purpose was to avoid having to give security for costs, and to get legal aid. In dismissing the argument that the transactions were a device to defeat . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Company

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.223194

Regina on the Application of Challender, and Morris v The Legal Services Commission: Admn 29 Apr 2004

Judges:

Mr Justice Richards

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 925 (Admin)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoChallender and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Legal Services Commission Admn 29-Apr-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Coroners, Legal Aid

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.196056

Gooday v Gooday: CA 1968

The court considered whether it was appropriate to order a contribution to costs from a legally aided party.
Held: Although the judge was correct that the wife should not have persisted in bringing a hopeless case against the husband, the 1949 Act also required him to consider the means of all the parties, and the order for andpound;200 was more than was reasonable in the circumstances.

Judges:

Diplock LJ

Citations:

[1968] 3 All ER 611

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1949 2(2)(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFowler De Pledge (A Firm) v Smith CA 20-May-2003
The appellant sought two permissions to appeal. Having at one stage been legally aided in proceedings, a claim for his solicitors costs had been compromised. The court records were imperfect. It was not clear whether a circuit judge sitting as a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.182738

Regina v Lord Chancellor ex parte the Law Society (2): QBD 22 Jun 1993

The introduction of a Standard Fees Criminal Legal Aid regime did not require prior consultation with the Law Society. The rules had been imposed in accordance with the words of the enabling statute.

Citations:

Independent 22-Jun-1993, Times 25-Jun-1993

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 34

Judicial Review, Costs, Legal Aid, Legal Professions

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.163155

Deg-Deutsche Investitions Und Entwicklungsgesellschaft Mbh v Koshy and Others: ChD 13 Jan 2000

Once a legal aid certificate is revoked the party is deemed by statute never to have had the benefit of a legal aid certificate. The rules relating to assessment of costs which applied when a party had legal aid did not therefore apply. An order however which has once been made cannot be varied subsequently by reference to those rules, even if the order was made in the light of them.

Citations:

Times 19-Jan-2000, Gazette 13-Jan-2000

Statutes:

Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 130, Civil Procedure Rules Part 3.1(7)

Legal Aid, Costs, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.79884

Regina v Inner London Crown Court ex parte Bentham: QBD 1989

The defendant sought legal aid to defend an action to abate a statutory nuisance under the 1936 Act.
Held: Such an action was criminal in nature. The action had been brought under section 99, but the imposition of a penalty under s94 was a criminal sentence. ‘On analysis, the position seem to be that proceedings are initiated by information under section 99, and that the information is then dealt with under section 94(2). It appears plain that the proceedinbgs under section 94(2) are criminal in character. The offence is the wrongdoing which leads to whatever order is in fact made; in this case, putting it generally, allowing premises to be in such a state as to be prejudicial to health.’

Judges:

Mann LJ

Citations:

[1989] 1 WLR 408

Statutes:

Public Health Act 1936 9492), Legal Aid Act 1974 28(5)

Citing:

FollowedRegina v Newham Justices, ex parte Hunt etc CA 1976
The court asked whether proceedings under s99 were civil or criminal.
Held: ‘the proper interpretation of this section [section 99] leads to the conclusion that the individual can by information invoke section 94’ The offence was under s94 . .

Cited by:

AppliedHerbert v Lambeth London Borough Council QBD 27-Nov-1991
An abatement order had been made against the council under the 1936 Act. The tenant appealed a finding that the magistrates had had no jurisdiction to award compensation under the 1973 Act.
Held: An order under the 1973 Act required a criminal . .
AdoptedBotross v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council QBD 7-Nov-1994
Statutory nuisance proceedings are in their nature criminal proceedings, and compensation may be awarded by the court. . .
CitedRegina v Liverpool Crown Court, Ex Parte Cooke QBD 3-Apr-1996
Complaint was made against the council for creating a statutory nuisance under the 1990 Act. The tenant sought compensation under the 1973 Act. The council appealed an award of andpound;3,000 compensation.
Held: Compensation should be awarded . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Nuisance, Legal Aid

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.221517

Lockley v National Blood Transfusion Service: CA 1992

There was an interlocutory dispute over the granting of an extension of time for service of the defence. The legally aided plaintiff challenged the costs orders made by the district registrar and the judge. Each ordered that the costs be the defendants’, ‘not to be enforced without leave of the court save by way of set-off as against damages and/or costs’.
Held: The plaintiff’s appeal on the costs order failed. ‘The issue in this appeal is whether, in a case where one party is legally aided, an order for costs in favour of the other party can direct that those costs be set-off against either damages or costs to which the legally aided party has become, or may in future become, entitled in the action.’
The court confirmed the right of a party to set off a costs award against a subsequent damages or costs award in favour of an assisted person. Section 16(8) simply preserved those rights of set-off that the general law would allow and protected them against the charge created by section 16(6). It did not create any new right of set-off. Its effect was to make it clear that whatever rights of set-off were available under the general law were available against legally aided parties notwithstanding the board’s charge.
Scott LJ discussed the principles applying on an application for set-off costs: ‘The broad criterion for the application of set-off is that the plaintiff’s claim and the defendant’s claim are so closely connected that it would be inequitable to allow the plaintiff’s claim without taking into account the defendant’s claim. As it has sometimes been put, the defendant’s claim must, in equity, impeach the plaintiff’s claim.
Set-off of costs or damages to which one party is entitled against costs or damages to which another party is entitled depends upon the application of the equitable criterion I have endeavoured to express. It was treated by May J in Currie and Co v The Law Society [1977] QB 990, 1000, as a ‘question for the court’s discretion’. It is possible to regard all questions regarding costs as being subject to the statutory discretion conferred on the court by section 51 of the Supreme Court Act 1981. But I would not have thought that a set-off of damages against damages could properly be described as a discretionary matter, nor that a set-off of costs against damages could be so described.’ and ‘A set-off of costs against costs, when all are incurred in the prosecution or defence of the same action, seems so natural and equitable as not to need any special justification. I would expect a party objecting to the set-off to give some special reason for the objection. It is, in my opinion, less obvious that a set-off of costs against damages would always be justified.’

Judges:

Farquharson LJ, Sir John Megaw, Scott L

Citations:

[1992] 1 WLR 492, [1992] 2 All ER 589

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1974 16(8)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Not FollowedAnderson v Hills Automobiles (Woodford) Ltd 1965
. .
AppliedCook v Swinfen CA 1967
The plaintiff could not recover damages for the mental distress of conducting litigation. The court found it difficult to draw the line as to where such damage could be identified. In this case the damage could not reasonably be said to have flowed . .
CitedCarr v Boxall 1960
. .
CitedCurrie and Co v The Law Society 1976
Set-off of costs or damages to which one party is entitled against costs or damages to which another party is entitled depends upon the application of equitable rules. May J said: ‘[T]he set-off takes precedence over the solicitor’s particular lien, . .

Cited by:

AppliedHill v Bailey ChD 25-Nov-2003
Costs orders had been made against each party in favour of the other. One was legally aided.
Held: Though the legally aided party was entitled to some protection against enforcement of an order for costs, he was not protected against the other . .
CitedSonia Burkett, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham CA 15-Oct-2004
The appellant challenged an order for costs after dismissal of her application for judicial review of the respondent’s planning decision. The claimant had been granted legal aid at about the time of the bringing in of the new legal aid scheme. The . .
CitedFranses v Al Assad and others ChD 26-Oct-2007
The claimant had obtained a freezing order over the proceeds of sale of a property held by solicitors. The claimant was liquidator of a company, and an allegation of wrongful trading had been made against the sole director and defendant. The . .
CitedAhmad v London Borough of Brent and Others QBD 25-Feb-2011
. .
CitedRybak and Others v Langbar International Ltd ChD 18-Feb-2011
. .
CitedWaltham Forest v Maloba, The Law Society CA 4-Dec-2007
The applicant had been refused accomodation as homeless after disclosing the ownership of a family home in Uganda. He had lived and worked in the UK for 15 years. The authority did not accept that it had later been repossessed. The council now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.190229

Cook v Swinfen: CA 1967

The plaintiff could not recover damages for the mental distress of conducting litigation. The court found it difficult to draw the line as to where such damage could be identified. In this case the damage could not reasonably be said to have flowed from the solicitor’s failures about which the complaint was made: ‘In these circumstances I think that, just as in the law of tort, so also in the law of contract, damages can be recovered for nervous shock or anxiety state if it is a reasonably foreseeable consequence. So the question became this: when a client goes to a solicitor, is it a reasonably foreseeable consequence that, if anything goes wrong with the litigation owing to the solicitor’s negligence, there will be a breakdown in health? It can be foreseen that there will be injured feelings; mental distress; anger; and annoyance; but for none of these can damage be recovered. It was so held in Groom v. Crocker [1939] 1 K.B. 194 on the same lines as Addis v. Gramophone Co. [1909] A.C. 488. Is it reasonably foreseeable that there may be an actual breakdown in health? I do not think so. It was suggested in this case that there were special circumstances in that Mrs. Cook was peculiarly liable to nervous shock. I am afraid she was. The history of her life shows one nervous breakdown after another. If this special circumstance was brought home to Mr. Swinfen, it might enlarge the area of foreseeability so as to make him liable. But it was not pleaded. and when Mr. Moloney put questions to Mr. Swinfen, he did not succeed in showing that special circumstances were brought home to him. All Mr. Swinfen knew was that she was a woman obviously highly strung and worried as any woman would be in the circumstances. But that does not mean that he should foresee that, if he was negligent, she would suffer injury to health. In all these cases of nervous shock and breakdown in mental health, it is very difficult to draw the line. In King v. Phillips [1953] 1 Q.B. 429, 442 I asked: ‘Where is the line to be drawn?’ I found the answer given by Lord Wright: ‘Only where’ in the particular case the good sense of the judge decides”.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1967] 1 WLR 457

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromCook v Swinfen 1966
. .

Cited by:

AppliedLockley v National Blood Transfusion Service CA 1992
There was an interlocutory dispute over the granting of an extension of time for service of the defence. The legally aided plaintiff challenged the costs orders made by the district registrar and the judge. Each ordered that the costs be the . .
DistinguishedHeywood v Wellers CA 1976
The claimant instructed solicitors in injunction proceedings which they conducted negligently. The solicitors had put the case in the hands of an incompetent junior clerk. She sued acting in person, and succeeded but now appealed the only limited . .
CitedWiseman v Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd QBD 29-Jun-2006
The claimant said that he was refused permission to board a flight by the defendants representative without paying a bribe, and was publicly humiliated for not doing so.
Held: Whilst the claimant could recover for his own additional expenses, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.190230

Anderson v Hills Automobiles (Woodford) Ltd: 1965

Judges:

Scott LJ

Citations:

[1965] CLY 3177, [1965] 1 WLR 745

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Not FollowedLockley v National Blood Transfusion Service CA 1992
There was an interlocutory dispute over the granting of an extension of time for service of the defence. The legally aided plaintiff challenged the costs orders made by the district registrar and the judge. Each ordered that the costs be the . .
CitedSonia Burkett, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham CA 15-Oct-2004
The appellant challenged an order for costs after dismissal of her application for judicial review of the respondent’s planning decision. The claimant had been granted legal aid at about the time of the bringing in of the new legal aid scheme. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.190231

Hicks v Russell Jones and Walker: 27 Oct 2000

Judges:

Robert Walker LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 27 October 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHill v Bailey ChD 25-Nov-2003
Costs orders had been made against each party in favour of the other. One was legally aided.
Held: Though the legally aided party was entitled to some protection against enforcement of an order for costs, he was not protected against the other . .
CitedSonia Burkett, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham CA 15-Oct-2004
The appellant challenged an order for costs after dismissal of her application for judicial review of the respondent’s planning decision. The claimant had been granted legal aid at about the time of the bringing in of the new legal aid scheme. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.190232

Davies v Taylor (No 2): HL 2 Jan 1974

The plaintiff argued that no costs had been incurred by the successful defendant, as he was insured, and the insurance company was bound to pay his costs.
Held: ‘In this case the solicitors, no doubt first instructed by the insurance company, were the solicitors on the record as the solicitors for the respondent. They acted for him and, in the absence of proof of an agreement between him and them or between them and the insurance company that he would not pay their costs, they could look to him for payment for the work done and his liability would not be excluded by the fact that the insurance company had itself agreed to pay their costs. In my opinion the costs incurred were incurred by the respondent in the sense in which those words are used in the Legal Aid Act 1964.’

Judges:

Viscount Dilhorne

Citations:

[1974] AC 225

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1964 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoDavies v Taylor HL 1974
The plaintiff’s husband was killed in a road accident caused by the defendant’s negligence. They were childless. She had deserted him five weeks before his death and thereafter, he learned about her adultery with a fellow employee. He tried to . .

Cited by:

CitedMiskin, Miskin v St John Vaughan SCCO 18-Sep-2002
The claimants resisted an order to pay the VAT element awarded on the defendant’s legal costs. The revenue had been unable to state clearly whether the defendant would be able to recover VAT, in which case it would not be payable, or the reverse. It . .
See AlsoDavies v Taylor HL 1974
The plaintiff’s husband was killed in a road accident caused by the defendant’s negligence. They were childless. She had deserted him five weeks before his death and thereafter, he learned about her adultery with a fellow employee. He tried to . .
CitedBee v Jenson ComC 21-Dec-2006
The defendant objected to paying the plaintiff the costs of a replacement hire car after the accident for which he was liable. He said that the plaintiff was in any event insured to recover that cost, and the insurance company were subrogated to the . .
CitedRadford and Another v Frade and Others QBD 8-Jul-2016
The court was asked as to the terms on which solicitors and Counsel were retained to act for the defendants. The appeals did not raise any issues concerning costs practice, and were by way of review of the Costs Judge’s rulings, and not by way of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.183450

Hanlon v The Law Society: HL 1981

The House considered the impact of the statutory charge under the 1974 Act in matrimonial proceedings.
Held: The costs in respect of which the statutory charge bit were the costs of the whole divorce proceedings and not just the financial relief aspect. For property to have been ‘recovered or transferred’ for this purpose, its ownership or transfer had to have actually been in issue in the proceedings.
The House gave guidance on the interpretation of Legal Aid Statutes: ‘The subsection, being an adaption for the benefit of the legal aid fund of Victorian legislation enacted for the benefit of solicitors, inevitably presents problems of interpretation. Two fall to be considered in this appeal. The first is to identify the proceedings to which the subsection applies. The second is to determine the meaning of the words ‘recovered or preserved” Lord Simon said: ‘property has been recovered or preserved if it has been in issue in the proceedings – recovered by the claimant if it has been the subject of a successful claim, preserved to the respondent if the claim fails. In either case it is a question of fact, not of theoretical ‘risk.’ In property adjustment proceedings, in my view, it is only property the ownership or transfer of which has been in issue which has been ‘recovered or preserved’ so as to be the subject of a legal aid charge. What has been in issue is to be collected as a matter of fact from pleadings, evidence, judgment and/or order. I can see no reason for extending the words to items of property the ownership or possession of which has never been questioned.’ As to the use of punctuation, Lord Lowry: ‘To ignore punctuation disregards the reality that literate people, such as parliamentary draftsmen, do punctuate what they write.’
Lord Lowry set out the circumstances in which a regulation made under a statutory power was admissible for the purpose of construing the statute under which it was made. Judges may look at the punctuation in order to interpret the meaning of legislation accepted by Parliament.
Lord Scarman said that in most cases a reference to the legal aid certificate would determine the extent of the charge. In two cases where this would not be appropriate – the inclusion in the certificate of proceedings which ought not to have been included such as proceedings for which legal aid was not available and the inclusion in one certificate of two sets of proceedings for which separate certificates should have been issued.

Judges:

Lord Scarman, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, Lord Lowry

Citations:

[1981] AC 124, [1980] 2 WLR 756, [1980] 2 All ER 199

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMorgan and Others v Legal Aid Board ChD 24-Apr-2000
The Legal Aid Board is entitled to a charge over property which is ‘recovered or preserved’ in proceedings in which the party is legally aided. Nevertheless, the charge could not be applied to property merely because it had been included within . .
CitedEarl Cadogan, Cadogan Estates Limited v Search Guarantees Plc CA 27-Jul-2004
The tenant of a house had subdivided it and let off the flats. He sought to acquire the freehold.
Held: Where none of the subtenants themselves had qualifying leases, the head tenant could be in sufficient occupation to be able to buy the . .
CitedA, Regina (on The Application of) v B; Regina (A) v Director of Establishments of the Security Service SC 9-Dec-2009
B, a former senior member of the security services wished to publish his memoirs. He was under contractual and statutory obligations of confidentiality. He sought judicial review of a decision not to allow him to publish parts of the book, saying it . .
CitedMS (Palestinian Territories) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 16-Jun-2010
The claimant faced removal and return to Palestine, but he said that he would not be accepted if returned. He had no ID card, birth certificate or living parents. He appealed against the decision of the IAT and now again from the Court of Appeal . .
CitedRevenue and Customs v Forde and McHugh Ltd SC 26-Feb-2014
The Court heard a number of appeals concerned with the interpretation of the phrase in section 6(1) of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992, ‘[w]here in any tax week earnings are paid to or for the benefit of an earner’ It was . .
CitedThe Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd and Others SC 20-Apr-2016
The Court considered the quantification of damages to be awarded to a business suffering under riots under the 1886 Act, and in particular whether such recoverable losses included compensation for consequential losses, including loss of profits and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Litigation Practice

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.183331

Chaggar v Chaggar: CA 1997

When considering making an order that an assisted person make a contribution to costs, the task of the court is set out in s 17: it is to decide the assisted parties’ liability for costs. Those costs must not exceed that which it is reasonable for the party to pay in all the circumstance. All the circumstances have to be taken into account, including the financial resources of both parties taking into account regulation 126. The court should consider the parties’ disposable income and disposable capital excluding the assets referred to in the regulations.

Judges:

Aldous LJ, Phillips LJ

Citations:

[1997] 1 All ER 104

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFowler De Pledge (A Firm) v Smith CA 20-May-2003
The appellant sought two permissions to appeal. Having at one stage been legally aided in proceedings, a claim for his solicitors costs had been compromised. The court records were imperfect. It was not clear whether a circuit judge sitting as a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.182739

In Re C (Legal Aid: Preparation of Bill of Costs): CA 2001

The appellant argued that the Costs Practice Direction, supplementing Parts 43-48 of the CPR, had the same force in law as the Legal Aid in Family Proceedings (Remuneration) Regulations 1991; and that they impliedly amended or repealed them in so far as they were inconsistent.
Held: The argument was rejected. Hale LJ said: ‘Unlike the Lord Chancellor’s orders under his ‘Henry VIII’ powers, the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 themselves and the 1991 Remuneration Regulations, the Practice Directions are not made by Statutory Instrument. They are not laid before Parliament or subject to either the negative or positive resolution procedures in Parliament. They go though no democratic process at all, although if approved by the Lord Chancellor he will bear ministerial responsibility for them to Parliament. But there is a difference in principle between delegated legislation which may be scrutinised by Parliament and ministerial executive action. There is no ministerial responsibility for Practice Directions made for the Supreme Court by the Heads of Division. As Professor Jolowicz says . . ‘It is right that the court should retain its power to regulate its own procedure within the limits set by statutory rules, and to fill in gaps left by those rules; it is wrong that it should have power actually to legislate’.’

Judges:

Hale LJ

Citations:

[2001] 1 FLR 602

Statutes:

Legal Aid in Family Proceedings (Remuneration) Regulations 1991, Civil Procedure Rules

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFloyd and Another v Legal Services Commission QBD 28-Apr-2010
The claimant had succeeded in an action against her legally aided opponent, but then delayed in making her claim for costs against the respondent. The costs judge said that the CPR did not apply, and that he had no discretion to extend the time . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.408768

Iverson v Iverson: 1966

Solicitors and counsel should report to the Legal Aid Board if the cost benefit position in the funded claim deteriorates after the grant of legal aid.

Citations:

[1966] 1 All ER 258

Cited by:

CitedMartin v Legal Services Commission Admn 27-Jul-2007
The claimant challenged by judicial review the discharge of a legal aid certificate in educational negligence proceedings.
Held: A final decision to revoke a legal aid certificate may be challenged by judicial review. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.408536

Regina v Legal Aid Board Ex Parte R M Broudie and Co: QBD 24 Nov 1994

LAB may refuse enhanced rates without opportunity for representations.

Citations:

Times 24-Nov-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoRegina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Tr M Broudie and Co (A Firm) QBD 11-Apr-1994
A taxing officer’s discretion as to ‘exceptional’ to remain unfettered. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.87161

Regina v Lord Chancellor ex parte the Law Society (1): QBD 4 May 1993

The introduction of a Standard Criminal Legal Aid fees regime was within the Lord Chancellor’s proper range of discretion, even without consultation with the Law Society.
The meaning of ‘carried entering UK’ can include clothing being worn, but caution to be used by the courts not to extend the meaning unnecessarily.

Citations:

Independent 04-May-1993, Ind Summary 20-Mar-1995, Times 05-May-1993

Statutes:

Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 78(2), Legal Aid Act 1988 34

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Lord Chancellor ex parte Law Society CA 11-Aug-1993
Lord Chancellor is free to impose a fee scheme if it accords with the words of the Act. The standard fees regulations for magistrates Courts works are within the Lord Chancellor’s powers. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Customs and Excise, Legal Aid, Costs, Criminal Practice

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.87220

Regina v Legal Aid Board, Ex Parte W and Others (Minors): CA 19 Sep 2000

When considering the granting of legal aid for a solicitor to be appointed to represent a child’s guardian ad litem in proceedings under section 34, the Board had failed to acknowledge the requirement under the Rules placed upon a guardian to be represented. There was no choice about the appointment. The power to reject an application could only be exercised where it was considered unreasonable to grant legal aid. The failure to consider the obligation was a fundamental flaw in the decision, which was vitiated.

Citations:

Times 19-Sep-2000, Gazette 05-Oct-2000

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 34, Family Proceedings Rules 1991 (1991/1247) 4.11 4.12, Legal Aid Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Legal Aid

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.85363

Fryer v Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors: CA 16 May 2000

A barrister giving an opinion for the purposes of assessing the potential for a success in a case for the purposes of applying for Legal Aid, need not specify in percentage terms the prospects of success. Decisions about wasted costs orders are in the nature of summary proceedings, and an appellate court should be reluctant to set aside a judge’s assessment of a case made in such situations.

Citations:

Times 16-May-2000

Statutes:

Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 4, Supreme Court Act 1981 5(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Professions, Legal Aid

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.80698

David MacDonald v Geoffrey Myerson and Others: CA 26 Jan 2001

The client obtained mortgages for properties through a fraud as to his identity. He was convicted of fraud, but in the meantime sold one property through the defendant solicitors. The mortgage was redeemed, but the defendant refused to pay the balance proceeds of sale to the claimant, on the basis that his claim was based upon an illegal contract. He asserted that he was simply entitled. The claimant succeeded, since it was admitted that in fact he was the person who had purchased and sold the property. It was for parliament if it wished to create any way of enhancing civil confiscation procedures.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Feb-2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Land

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.135602

Regina v Legal Aid Board, Ex Parte Burrows: CA 8 Mar 2001

A client was granted legal aid in a children case, but with a costs limitation of andpound;5,000. The solicitor did not apply to extend that limit, but exceeded it. When the excess was disallowed, he challenged the right of the Board to impose limitations in public law cases.
Held: The word ‘limitation’ must bear its ordinary and natural meaning. The section allowed the Board to impose such limitations, and there was nothing inherently unjust about them, since an amendment could be sought, and further appeal was allowed.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Mar-2001, Times 16-Mar-2001

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 15 (4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.88531

Lambeth London Borough Council v S and C and V and J and Legal Services Commission: FD 3 May 2005

The council brought care proceedings. A residential assessment was to be ordered. The Council sought an order for the respondent mother who was legally aided to bear a portion of the cost of the assessment. The Legal Services Commission intervened to object to any order to pay any contribution to the costs.
Held: An assessment under section 38(6) was not part of the local authority’s case, but something directed by the Court. It was exercised as part of the Court’s attempt to satisfy the overriding objective which in such proceedings set out to include expert opinion. There was no distinction of principle between the oder for an assesment and an order for a jointly instructed expert, and the Calderdale criteria could be applied. The Legal Services Commission could be required to contribute.

Judges:

Ryder J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 776 (Fam), Times 19-May-2005

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 38, Access to Justice Act 1999 22(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedCalderdale Metropolitan Borough Council v S and Another FD 18-Oct-2004
An expert’s report was required for the purposes of care proceedings. The court ordered that the cost be paid as to half by the local authority, where there were three other parties. The authority appealed.
Held: The authority’s appeal was . .

Cited by:

CitedKent County Council v G and others HL 24-Nov-2005
A residential assessment order had been made under the 1989 Act in care proceedings. When the centre recommended a second extension of the assessment, the council refused, saying that the true purpose was not the assessment of the child but the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Local Government, Legal Aid

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.225011

Sayers and Other v Smithkline Beecham plc and others: QBD 30 Jul 2004

In group litigation in respect of the MMR vaccinne, certain lead claimants had had their legal aid withdrawn.
Held: They would be allowed to withdraw from the action and would not require the permission of the court.

Judges:

Keith J

Citations:

Times 22-Oct-2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Legal Aid

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.220018

Re A Debtor: CA 9 Feb 1981

The husband opposed assisted proceedings brought by his wife, in which he was ordered to pay a sum of costs. He did not pay, and the Law Society brought proceedings against him for their recovery. He sought to set-off against that claim a debt allegedly owed to him by his wife.
Held: The court referred to the machinery for the collection and administration of a costs order in favour of an assisted person: ‘[T]his means that the assisted person never obtains the slightest entitlement as beneficiary to a single penny payable by virtue of an order in his favour for costs . . . Any order for costs is only made in the name of the assisted person for the purposes of identification and taxation . . .No set-off can arise because the money never belongs to the assisted person; it belongs to the Legal Aid Fund.’

Judges:

Templeman LJ

Citations:

Times 19-Feb-1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSonia Burkett, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham CA 15-Oct-2004
The appellant challenged an order for costs after dismissal of her application for judicial review of the respondent’s planning decision. The claimant had been granted legal aid at about the time of the bringing in of the new legal aid scheme. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.216496

Morgan and Others v Legal Aid Board: ChD 24 Apr 2000

The Legal Aid Board is entitled to a charge over property which is ‘recovered or preserved’ in proceedings in which the party is legally aided. Nevertheless, the charge could not be applied to property merely because it had been included within assets dealt with by a consent order. The property over which a charge is sought must have been in issue within the proceedings, or was substituted for such property.

Citations:

Times 24-Apr-2000

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHanlon v The Law Society HL 1981
The House considered the impact of the statutory charge under the 1974 Act in matrimonial proceedings.
Held: The costs in respect of which the statutory charge bit were the costs of the whole divorce proceedings and not just the financial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.83828

Kelly v South Manchester Health Authority: CA 7 May 1998

The Court refused to award costs against the Legal Aid Board, but accepted that, in exceptional circumstances, an order may be made if they had made a contribution by delay which added to the costs of the action.

Citations:

Times 07-May-1998

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 18

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromKelly v South Manchester Health Authority 1997
A costs order was sought against the Legal Aid Board.
Thomas J. said: ‘In my judgment, the courts do have power in an appropriate and exceptional case to make an order in respect of costs against the board under section 51(1); the role of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.82718

Regina v Dadshani: 8 Feb 2008

Ontario – Superior Court of Justice – proceeding in the nature of a Rowbotham or Fisher application to secure state funding for the defences of the accused who are facing charges of first degree murder.

Judges:

C McKinnon J

Citations:

2008 CanLII 4266 (ON SC)

Links:

Canlii

Citing:

CitedRegina v Rowbotham and others 1988
Ontario Court of Appeal – ‘In our view a trial judge confronted with an exceptional case where legal aid has been refused and who is of the opinion that representation of the accused by counsel is essential to a fair trial may, upon being satisfied . .

Cited by:

CitedP, Regina v Misc 18-Mar-2008
Crown Court at Harrow – The Court stayed the criminal proceedings because the defendant was unable to retain counsel because of what was said to be a failure to provide adequate legal aid fees in criminal confiscation proceedings. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Legal Aid, Criminal Practice

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.541394

K Zaman Ali and Co v The Lord Chancellor; (Regina v Zaka): SCCO 26 Oct 2001

This was a criminal appeal by solicitors who had submitted their bill of costs in which work was claimed at prescribed legal aid rates for grade A fee earner level, which was however accompanied by a letter, which started with the following paragraphs:
‘We are grateful for the kind extension of time granted to submit our bill of costs with the further extension allowing us to send our papers by DX on Monday 22 instant.
Enhancement is respectfully claimed in this case for the following reasons …’
No percentage enhancement however is actually mentioned in either this letter, or of course in the bill.
The Determining Officer refused to allow any enhancement, holding that what he had to consider was the bill and that any accompanying letter was a supporting document not to be read as part of the bill.
The Costs Judge affirmed the decision of the Determining Officer, but granted a certificate to allow the matter to proceed to a final appeal in the High Court.
On the facts the Judge decided the appeal against the solicitors, but he did lay down some general principles to be followed in future cases to ensure that decisions of Determining Officers were not ‘Wednesbury unreasonable’.
He apparently suggested that the Determining Officer could, in a situation such as arose here, either refer the whole bill back to the solicitors to make a proper claim to include enhancement; he could deal with it as if enhancement had been claimed; or he could make reasonable enquiries.
What seems to have been fatal to the solicitors’ appeal in this case is that they neither claimed enhancement in the bill itself, nor did they specify in the accompanying letter what rate of enhancement they were seeking. However in the light of the Judge’s comments summarised above it seems unlikely that this situation will recur.
The Judge made no order as to the costs of the appeal, although the Lord Chancellor’s Department was represented by counsel.

Judges:

Mr Justice Butterfield sitting without Assessors

Citations:

[2001] EW Costs 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185952

Regina (Ecclestone) v Legal Aid Board: SCCO 5 Oct 2001

This was a review under RSC Order 62 rule 35. Many years previously, E had suffered abuse when in care. He obtained legal aid to bring a claim for compensation against his local authority and his solicitors wished to instruct an expert who was based in London. He lived in Liverpool. The relevant Legal Aid Board would not give authority to incur the expenses of travelling to London. After challenging the Legal Aid Board decision at various hearings, he obtained legal aid to apply for judicial review of the Legal Aid Board’s refusal. He was successful and an order for costs was made against the Legal Aid Board as well as an order for a legal aid taxation. The main issue in this review related to costs claimed in respect of the judicial review proceedings before legal aid was granted. On taxation (in 1998) the Master disallowed the pre legal aid costs relying on the indemnity principle. The Master held that there was no legal liability on E to pay these costs to the solicitor and, therefore, there were no costs in this period which E could claim from the Legal Aid Board. On 6 April 1999, in the period after taxation but before objections were heard by the Master, E signed a witness statement which stated, amongst other things: ‘My solicitor advised me that I would be personally responsible for the fees involved and whether steps were taken to recover those costs would be a matter of good will on my solicitor’s part. It was never agreed expressly or impliedly that under no circumstances whatsoever would I be responsible for the costs involved or that I would not have to pay any costs. It was, of course, well known to me and my solicitors that my means were extremely limited … However this did not mean that I was not legally responsible for my solicitors costs which were not covered by legal aid.’

Judges:

Mr Justice Scott Baker sitting with Assessors

Citations:

[2001] EW Costs 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185948

Re: Homes Assured Corporation Plc The Official Receiver v Dobson and Others; similar: SCCO 28 Nov 2001

CourtService In these two related appeals heard together the learned Judge dealt with the appropriate penalty to apply when Regulation 109 of the Legal Aid (General) Regulations was invoked. In the first case there had been a delay of 4 years between the conclusion of the proceedings and the notice of commencement of the assessment proceedings, which the Deputy Costs Judge had held to be totally unreasonable, so that he allowed no profit costs whatsoever. The authorities were reviewed. A complete disallowance of the solicitors’ profit costs was not an appropriate remedy, bearing in mind that the Legal Services Commission had not suffered any prejudice, and indeed the only prejudice suffered might have been that of the claimants’ solicitors. The Judge did not feel it appropriate to lay down any rule in relation to such applications, but, on the facts of this case where the bill was some andpound;30,000, he felt that a 30% deduction from the bill was appropriate. In the second case the Costs Judge had taken an adverse view of the claimants solicitors conduct, which the learned Judge did not consider to have been correct, but in that case he did not feel that he had sufficient information to come to a final decision, and therefore remitted the matter to the Costs Judge for reconsideration in the light of his judgment.

Judges:

Mr Justice Park sitting with Assessors

Citations:

[2001] EW Costs 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185955

R M Broudle and Co (A Firm) v Lord Chancellor: CA 4 Jul 2000

A criminal legal aid order came to an end when a single judge refused leave to appeal. The costs of an application to renew to the full court could only be met if the full court so agreed. The determining officer has followed this as consistent policy which was not to be changed by the case of R v Gibson ((1983) 77 Cr App R 151.

Citations:

Times 04-Jul-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.85634

The Law Society, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Chancellor: Admn 3 Aug 2018

Claim for judicial review of a decision by the Lord Chancellor to reduce the amount of money made available as legal aid for defending people accused of crimes. The decision challenged in these proceedings has reduced fees payable under a scheme called the Litigators’ Graduated Fees Scheme under which most of the work done by ‘litigators’ (typically solicitors) in preparing the defence of persons prosecuted in the Crown Court is paid.
‘If the alleged technical error is not incontrovertible but is a matter on which there is room for reasonable divergence of expert opinion, an irrationality argument will not succeed.’

Judges:

Leggatt LJ, Carr DBE J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 2094 (Admin), [2018] WLR(D) 560, [2018] 5 Costs LR 937, [2019] 1 WLR 1649, [2018] ACD 112, [2019] 1 All ER 638

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGardner and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and Others Admn 27-Apr-2022
Patient transfer policy was unlawful
The claimants had relatives who died in care homes early in the COVID-19 pandemic. They said that the policy of moving patients from hospitals to care homes without testing had contributed to the deaths, and many others, and had been unlawful. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Administrative

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.620667

Northamptonshire County Council and Another v The Lord Chancellor (Via The Legal Aid Agency): FD 5 Jun 2018

The court considered the circumstances in which damages recovered pursuant to the Human Rights Act in respect of breaches of duty by a Local Authority following care proceedings are subject to the Legal Aid Agency statutory charge in respect of the costs of those care proceedings.

Judges:

Francis J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1628 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621049

Flannigan, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Legal Aid Casework The Lord Chancellor: Admn 25 Jul 2018

Application for Judicial Review of decisions made by the Director of Legal Aid Casework (the first Defendant) requiring Mr Flannigan to reimburse legal costs paid to lawyers acting for Mr Flannigan in defence of certain criminal charges.

Judges:

Bird HHJ

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1927 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620642

Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Legal Aid Casework: CA 19 Jul 2018

Claim challenging application of statutory charge extinguishing damages award.

Judges:

Longmore, Peter Jackson, Asplin LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 1656, [2018] WLR(D) 459

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Community Legal Service (Financial) Regulations 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620463

Law Centres Federation Limited (T/A Law Centres Network), Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Chancellor: Admn 22 Jun 2018

Claim for judicial review of two decisions made by the Defendant in connection with the provision of legal services under those Housing Possession Court Duty (‘HPCD’) schemes which are funded by Legal Aid.

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 1588 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619912

Bradstock Trustee Services Ltd v Nabarro Nathanson: ChD 1995

The plaintiffs were trustees of an occupational pension scheme. It began professional negligence proceedings to recover an expected surplus paid to the employer by the solicitors whose advice had been acted on. The anticipated costs were disproportionate, so the case was assigned with the consent of the court to beneficiaries who sued under legal aid. They then applied to the court to be substituted as plaintiffs.
Held: The application failed. The trustees had not failed in the performance of their duty to protect the trust estate by declining to continue the action and the applicants had no cause of action against the solicitors since they had no legal or equitable property in the subject-matter of the action. They were simply beneficiaries of any property recovered by the trustees. The trust estate would probably be liable for costs if the action failed and there was nothing in the rules of court to justify handing over the conduct of the action against the third party and accordingly he had no jurisdiction to make the orders sought.

Judges:

Baker QC J

Citations:

[1995] 1 WLR 1405

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRoberts v Gill and Co and Another CA 15-Jul-2008
The claimant sought damages in negligence against solicitors who had advised the executors in an estate of which he was a beneficiary. He now sought to amend his claim to make a claim in his personal and in derivative capacities. Sums had been paid . .
CitedRoberts v Gill and Co Solicitors and Others SC 19-May-2010
The claimant beneficiary in the estate sought damages against solicitors who had acted for the claimant’s brother, the administrator, saying they had allowed him to take control of the assets in the estate. The will provided that property was to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Legal Aid

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.279804

Willis v Redbridge Health Authority: CA 22 Dec 1995

An unsuccessful Defendant cannot be ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis to a legally aided Plaintiff, even if it might otherwise be justified. The normal basis is for standard costs.

Judges:

Beldam LJ

Citations:

Gazette 11-Jan-1996, Times 22-Dec-1995, [1996] 1 WLR 1228

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMalhotra v Dhawan CA 26-Feb-1997
There had been litigation as to the payment due on fees earned during the partnership. One party had destroyed the evidence which would have settled many issues. The court discussed the principle that it should presume all against a destroyer of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.90539

Regina v Legal Aid Board No 15 Area (Merseyside), Ex Parte European Community: QBD 6 May 1998

LAB had the power to give prior authorisation to allow payment of travel expenses of assisted person to visit expert to assist in preparation of expert report where assisted person unable to afford travel.

Citations:

Times 06-May-1998

Statutes:

Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 (SI 1989 No 339)

Legal Aid

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.88530

Regina v Selby Justices, ex parte Daltry: QBD 1 Dec 2000

If a court laid a charge of contempt of court, legal aid should normally be granted to the defendant. It was wrong, first to hear representations which led to the charge of contempt being withdrawn, and then to decide that legal aid should not be granted because it was no longer necessary. The effect of this practice would be that legal aid would only be available for sentence for contempt. Contempt is a potentially serious matter and a defendant will generally require representation.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Dec-2000, Times 01-Dec-2000

Legal Aid, Contempt of Court

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.88000

Regina v Legal Aid Board No 15 Area (Merseyside), ex parte Eccleston: QBD 20 May 1998

LAB had the power to give prior authorisation to allow payment of travel expenses of assisted person to visit expert to assist in preparation of expert report where assisted person unable to afford travel.

Citations:

Gazette 20-May-1998

Statutes:

Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 (SI 1989 No 339)

Legal Aid

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87165

Regina v Legal Aid Board, ex parte Nicholson: QBD 24 Jun 1994

A Legal Aid certificate may be amended after judgment had been given to name a new solicitor.

Citations:

Times 24-Jun-1994

Citing:

See AlsoRegina v The Law Society, Ex parte Nicholson 22-Feb-1985
A legal aid committee could not refuse legal aid under this provision solely on the ground that the applicant had acquired the cause of action by assignment from an insolvent company, without having regard to the other circumstances of the case. . .

Cited by:

See AlsoRegina v The Law Society, Ex parte Nicholson 22-Feb-1985
A legal aid committee could not refuse legal aid under this provision solely on the ground that the applicant had acquired the cause of action by assignment from an insolvent company, without having regard to the other circumstances of the case. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87169

Regina v Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council, Ex Parte C (A Child): QBD 26 Apr 2000

An appeal to the local education authority against a decision not to grant a place at the parents choice of primary school, because it would require additional resources to provide for larger class sizes, is by way of review, and not by way of a rehearing. Accordingly the appeal committee should base its decision on the information available on the original decision together with any information of which they should have been aware.

Citations:

Times 26-Apr-2000

Statutes:

Education Act 1966 (Infant Class Sizes) (Modification) Regulations 1998 (1998 no 1948)

Citing:

Appealed toRegina v Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council and Another, Ex Parte JC (A Child) CA 10-Aug-2000
The restrictions placed upon the maximum class sizes in turn restricted the rights of parents to appeal against refusal of a school place. It is for the parent to satisfy the original admissions committee and the appeal committee of the need for a . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Richmond Upon Thames London Borough Council and Another, Ex Parte JC (A Child) CA 10-Aug-2000
The restrictions placed upon the maximum class sizes in turn restricted the rights of parents to appeal against refusal of a school place. It is for the parent to satisfy the original admissions committee and the appeal committee of the need for a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Education, Litigation Practice, Legal Aid

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85462

Regina v Legal Aid Board, Ex P Parsons: CA 1 Apr 1999

An applicant for legal aid has a duty similar to someone applying for insurance, and must disclose all material facts. The board correctly revoked a certificate, leaving him responsible for all costs. This is an administrative, not a punitive act.

Citations:

Times 01-Apr-1999, [1999] 3 All ER 347

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina (Bateman and Bateman) v Legal Services Commission Admn 10-Sep-2001
The applicants sought a judicial review after their legal aid certificates were revoked for non-disclosure of various financial receipts. A financial statement prepared on their behalf had suggested substantial capital assets. The relationship . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85359

Murria v Lord Chancellor: QBD 11 Jan 2000

The test, when assessing the rate of pay for legal aid purposes of whether a case ‘related to fraud’ was whether the proceedings, in whole or in part, were about serious or complex fraud, irrespective of the contents of the indictment. There is no general offence known to law of fraud as such and the act could only be intended to relate to such issues in a wider sense than the content of the indictment.

Citations:

Times 11-Jan-2000, Gazette 20-Jan-2000

Statutes:

Legal Aid in Criminal and Care Proceedings (General) Regulations 1989 (1989 No 344)

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84141

Microsoft Corporation v Backslash Distribution Ltd et Al: ChD 15 Mar 1999

Legal Aid Regulations providing that a legally aided defendant could in some circumstances be ordered to pay the costs of a prosecution after a contempt and on an indemnity basis were not invalid. An award of a gross sum in lieu of part costs was not proper.

Citations:

Times 15-Mar-1999

Statutes:

Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 103 24

Legal Aid

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83692

Middleton v Middleton: FD 4 Jun 1993

The court can extend the time for filing an affidavit re an order for costs against the Legal Aid Board.

Citations:

Times 04-Jun-1993

Citing:

Appealed toMiddleton v Middleton CA 10-Jan-1994
Legal Aid Act gives no power to extend time for filing affidavit under regulations. . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromMiddleton v Middleton CA 10-Jan-1994
Legal Aid Act gives no power to extend time for filing affidavit under regulations. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83700

In the Matter of an Application for Costs Against Legal Aid Board; Lancashire Fires Ltd v S A Lyons and Co Ltd and Others (No 2): CA 23 Jul 1999

An application for payment of a successful party’s costs out of the Legal Aid Fund should normally be made at the end of a trial, but it might well be made later when it proved impossible to recover costs against other parties to the action. In this case the delay did prevent it being just and equitable to make the order.

Citations:

Times 23-Jul-1999, Gazette 28-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1718

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1974 18

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82916

Airey v Ireland: ECHR 9 Oct 1979

Family law proceedings such as judicial separation do give rise to civil rights. In complex cases article 6 might require some provision for legal assistance, the precise form being a matter for the member state. The Court reiterated the importance of the right of access to a court, having regard to the prominent place held in a democratic society by the right to a fair trial.
There may be circumstances in which, without the assistance of a legally qualified representative, a litigant might be denied her Article 6 right to be able to present her case properly and satisfactorily. Ireland was in breach of Mrs. Airey’s Article 6 rights because it was not realistic to suppose that, in litigation of the type in which she was involved, she could effectively conduct her own case, despite the assistance which the judge affords to parties acting in person.

Citations:

6289/73, Series A no 32, (1979) 2 EHRR 305, [1979] ECHR 3, (1980) 2 EHRR 305

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

CitedBoyle and Rice v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-Apr-1988
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
The first applicant had been convicted and sentenced for murder and subsequent acts of . .
CitedSecretary of State for Work and Pensions v Kehoe CA 5-Mar-2004
The claimant had applied to the Child Support Agncy for maintenance. They failed utterly to obtain payment, and she complained now that she was denied the opportunity by the 1991 Act to take court proceedings herself.
Held: The denial of . .
See AlsoAirey v Ireland ECHR 6-Feb-1981
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Costs and expenses – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected. . .
CitedSteel and Morris v United Kingdom ECHR 15-Feb-2005
The applicants had been sued in defamation by McDonalds. They had no resources, and English law precluded legal aid for such cases. The trial was the longest in English legal history. They complained that the non-availablility of legal aid infringed . .
CitedCampbell v MGN Ltd (No 2) HL 20-Oct-2005
The appellant sought to challenge the level of costs sought by the claimant after she had succeeded in her appeal to the House. Though a relatively small sum had been awarded, the costs and success fee were very substantial. The newspaper claimed . .
CitedMAK and RK v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Mar-2010
mak_ukECHR10
When RK, a nine year old girl was taken to hospital, with bruises, the paediatrician wrongly suspecting sexual abuse, took blood samples and intimate photographs in the absence of the parents and without their consent.
Held: The doctor had . .
CitedMGN Limited v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Jan-2011
The applicant publisher said that the finding against it of breach of confidence and the system of success fees infringed it Article 10 rights to freedom of speech. It had published an article about a model’s attendance at Narcotics anonymous . .
CitedLopez Ostra v Spain ECHR 9-Dec-1994
A waste treatment plant was built close to the applicant’s home in an urban location and the plant released fumes and smells which caused health problems to local residents.
Held: A duty exists to take reasonable and appropriate measures to . .
CitedBryant and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis Admn 23-May-2011
Several claimants sought leave to bring judicial review of decisions taken by the defendant in the investigation of suggestions that their telephone answering systems had been intercepted by people working for the News of the World. They said that . .
CitedApollo Engineering Ltd v James Scott Ltd (Scotland) SC 13-Jun-2013
After long running litigation between the parties, a shareholder and director of Apollo sought to represent the company in person. He was refused leave by the Court of Session, and now sought to appeal. The Court considered the possibility of an . .
CitedQ v Q FD 21-May-2014
The father sought contact with his child. It was resisted by the mother. He was a convicted sex offender with offences against young male children. Expert evidence had been obtained, and he wished to challenge it. However, legal aid had been . .
CitedIn re X and Others (Deprivation of Liberty) CoP 7-Aug-2014
inreX_dolCoP1408
The court considered the practical and procedural implications for the Court of Protection of what was expected too be a large increase in its case-load which following the Supreme Court’s decision in Surrey County Council v P where it was held that . .
CitedJordan, Re for Judicial Review SC 6-Mar-2019
(Northern Ireland) The deceased had been shot by a member of the Royal Ulster Constabulary in 1992. There had been inquests in 1995 and 2012, but proceedings were again brought alleging delay. The Court of Appeal had ordered a further stay of . .
CitedOWD Ltd (T/A Birmingham Cash and Carry) and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 19-Jun-2019
The wholesalers sought approval from the respondent for the wholesale supply of duty-paid alcohol. Approval was refused, but the parties sought a means of allowing a temporary approval pending determination by the FTT. The two questions considered . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Legal Aid, Family

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.164888

Jones and Another v Congregational and General Insurance plc: QBD 2 May 2003

The claimants had lost their claim on an insurance policy, and had had costs awarded against them subject only to the issue of whether the fact that they had been legally aided protected them.
Held: The applicants had been found to be guilty of fraud, both as to the underlying claim, and in their applications for legal aid. They were accordingly not entitled to the protection which those with a legal aid certificate would normally receive.

Judges:

Chamber QC J

Citations:

Times 07-Jul-2003

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 11(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.184553

Jan Salplachta: ECJ 26 Jul 2017

(Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Area of freedom, security and justice – Access to justice in cross-border cases – Directive 2003/8 / EC – Common minimum rules on legal aid in such cases – Application – Regulation of a Member State providing for the non-reimbursable nature of the costs of translating the related documents necessary for the processing of an application for legal aid

Citations:

C-670/15, [2017] EUECJ C-670/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Legal Aid

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.591347