Connelly v RTZ Corporation Plc: CA 29 Sep 1995

Availability of legal aid to a party is not a relevant consideration to rules of forum non conveniens.

Citations:

Independent 29-Sep-1995, Times 20-Oct-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromConnelly v RTZ Corporation Plc and others HL 24-Jul-1997
The availability of legal aid to a party is not part of criteria for choosing jurisdiction save in exceptional circumstances.
Lord Goff discussed the Spiliada case: ‘the burden of proof rests on the defendant to persuade the court to exercise . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Jurisdiction, Legal Aid

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.79443

The Lord Chancellor v Blavo and Co Solictors Ltd and Another: QBD 21 Dec 2018

Attempt to recover legal aid fees said to have been paid on fraudulent claims.

Judges:

Pepperall J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 3556 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Torts – Other, Legal Professions

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.632217

Norglen 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 terms that the company would benefit from success. There was no jurisdiction to make an order for security for costs against Mr and Mrs Rodgers (who had taken the assignment from Norglen Ltd) and it would not in the circumstances be right to make an order against Norglen, which was dropping out of the action.

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham M.R., Hobhouse and Aldous L.JJ

Citations:

Independent 12-Jan-1996, Times 06-Dec-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

DistinguishedAdvanced 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. . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromNorglen 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

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.84328

Stretch v West Dorset District Council (2): CA 13 May 1999

A local authority resisting an appeal by a legally aided plaintiff could be awarded costs. The court should be careful not to depart from the wording of the Act, and an order did not depend upon any finding of wrongful behaviour by a party. The plaintiff had sought to exercise an option in a lease granted to him, but which option was ultra vires.

Citations:

Times 20-May-1999, Gazette 26-May-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1409

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1974 18

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Local Government

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.146324

Machi, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Commission: Admn 23 Jul 2001

Lawfulness of the imposition by the Legal Services Commission (the defendant) of an embargo on work being done under a full legal aid certificate before the discharge of the certificate under the Legal Aid Act 1988 and the Regulations of 1989 made thereunder. The effect of the embargo in this case, imposed because the claimant was considered unreasonably to have refused an offer of settlement made very shortly before trial, was to leave the claimant unrepresented at that trial.

Judges:

Ouseley J

Citations:

[2001] EWHC 580 (Admin), [2002] ACD 8

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.396528

The Law Society, Regina (on the Application of) v Legal Services Commission and others: Admn 27 Jul 2007

The Law Society challenged the manner of introduction by the defendant of the proposed Unified Contract for the provision of legal aided services.

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1848 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Professions, Legal Aid

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.259641

Southwark Law Centre, Regina (on the Application of) v Legal Services Commission: Admn 20 Jul 2007

In each case, the legal aid claimants had been refused legal aid on financial grounds. They were in dispute with their landlords, and were withholding rent. The respondents included the unpaid rent in their income, so disallowing the applications.
Held: The Commission was wrong. The wording was that they should deduct the ‘rent payable’ not just the rent paid. The wording had been chosen to achieve this effect.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1715 (Admin), Times 20-Aug-2007, [2007] 4 All ER 754, [2008] 1 WLR 1368

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Community Legal Service (Financial) Regulations 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.258159

Martin 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.

Judges:

Ouseley J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1786 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 15(2), Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 (1989 No 339) 77

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedIverson 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. . .

Cited by:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Judicial Review, Human Rights

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.258486

Regina v Brighton and Hove Council ex parte Nacion: CA 1 Feb 1999

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 687

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoRegina v Brighton and Hove Council ex parte Nacion (2) CA 1-Feb-1999
The applicant sought review of a decision not to offer him temporary accomodation pending an appeal following a review of a refusal to offer him emergency accomodation. He had become homeless as a result of imprisonment.
Held: The section gave . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.145602

Chohan v Times Newspapers Limited; Singh and Choudry (a Firm) and Choudry: CA 4 Dec 1998

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 1916

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoChohan v Times Newspapers Ltd CA 25-Feb-1999
. .
See AlsoTimes Newspapers Ltd v Chohan CA 22-Jun-2001
The limitation period on collection of an award of costs, must run from the date of the costs certificate. It was only at that point when it became enforceable. It would be an abuse to bring an action for enforce the costs award before that date. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Legal Professions

Updated: 30 November 2022; Ref: scu.145395

Harrison v Dace: CA 13 Oct 1998

Application for leave to appeal in a boundary dispute: ‘In my view it is a misuse of legal aid and at a time when we are being told that deserving people are not getting legal aid, because of the cost to the public of excessive public money being used for litigation, it is peculiarly sad to find that it should have been spent on this rather arid exercise with which this court is being asked to deal today.’

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 1524

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Legal Aid

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.145003

Regina 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.

Judges:

Hodgson J

Citations:

Unreported, 22 February 1985

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 15(3)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoRegina 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. . .

Cited by:

See AlsoRegina 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. . .
CitedNorglen 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

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.223198

Carr v Boxall: 1960

Judges:

Cross J

Citations:

[1960] 1 WLR 314

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLockley 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 . .
Per IncuriamSonia 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: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.216497

Regina (Mudie and Another) v Dover Magistrates’ Court and Another: CA 4 Feb 2003

The applicants wished to challenge the confiscation of their goods by the Commissioners of Customs and Excise on their return to Dover. They appealed the refusal of Legal Aid.
Held: The Convention guaranteed the right to legal assistance for someone charged with a criminal offence and who could not afford representation, but these condemnation proceedings were civil not criminal. The claimants argued that a finding against them involved a finding of reprehensible behaviour (Engel), but this mistook the court’s function which was to decide whether the goods were liable to seizure.

Judges:

Phillips of Worth Matravers, MR, Brooke, Laws LJJ

Citations:

Times 07-Feb-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 237, [2003] QB 1238, [2003] 2 WLR 1344

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 12(2), Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 Sch 3 para 6, European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGoldsmith and Another v Commissioners of Customs and Excise QBD 7-Jun-2001
The applicants were stopped after bringing into the country 26 kilos of tobacco, without declaring it. The customs applied for an order condemning the tobacco. The applicants argued that the proceedings were, in effect, criminal proceedings, and . .
CitedEngel And Others v The Netherlands (1) ECHR 8-Jun-1976
The court was asked whether proceedings in a military court against soldiers for disciplinary offences involved criminal charges within the meaning of Article 6(1): ‘In this connection, it is first necessary to know whether the provision(s) defining . .

Cited by:

CitedGora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others CA 11-Apr-2003
The appellants challenged decisions of the VAT and Duties Tribunal after seizure of their goods, and in particular whether the cases had been criminal or civil cases and following Roth, whether the respondent’s policy had been lawful and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Customs and Excise, Magistrates, Legal Aid, Human Rights

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.178991

Levy v Legal Aid Board: ChD 24 Feb 2000

Although an order for costs might in some circumstances not be provable in an insolvency, that did not prevent a statutory demand based upon that debt. Whether it was provable would become clear in the later insolvency proceedings. The court had a discretion to found a petition on an unproveable debt where there were special circumstances such as, for example other debts which were provable.

Citations:

Gazette 24-Feb-2000, Gazette 16-Mar-2000

Statutes:

Insolvency Rules 1986/1925 12 3 (2) (a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Legal Aid, Insolvency

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.83037

Main, Regina (on the Application of) v Minister for Legal Aid: Admn 2 Apr 2007

The applicants were relatives of victims of a rail accident. They challenged the refusal of legal aid for representation at the coroners inquest.
Held: Judicial review was granted. The minister’s decision was flawed in that he had failed to allow for the fact that the issues to be aired in the cases were both of wide public interest and of potential benefit for the public as a whole, and that the interetss of those appearing before the inquest would be divergent.

Judges:

Owen J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 742 (Admin), Times 09-May-2007

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Coroners, Human Rights

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.251161

Malekout v Medical Sickness Annuity and Life Assurance Society Limited: CA 21 May 1998

The plaintiff sought to appeal against a stay of his action so that it could be referred to arbitration. His claim was under insurance policies containing clauses providing for arbitration of disputes.
Held: The judge had failed to take account of the fact that the claimant was receiving income support as an indication of his lack of funds. Since a payment under the policies would have put him in funds, the fact of non-payment was connected to his present inability to fund an action, and nor was it correct to have dismissed the plaintiff’s need for assistance in an arbitration where technical legal and medical issues would arise.

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 872

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedTrustee of Property of Andrews v Brock Buildings (Kessingland) Limited CA 21-Nov-1996
An impecunious plaintiff who resisted an application to stay proceedings in order to allow an arbitration can be required to show the cause of his inability to fund the action. . .
CitedFakes v Taylor Woodrow Construction Limited 1973
The plaintiff resisted an application for a stay of his action for an arbitration on the basis that his lack of funds would make it impossible to take part in an arbitration. . .
CitedConnelly v RTZ Corporation Plc and others HL 24-Jul-1997
The availability of legal aid to a party is not part of criteria for choosing jurisdiction save in exceptional circumstances.
Lord Goff discussed the Spiliada case: ‘the burden of proof rests on the defendant to persuade the court to exercise . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Legal Aid

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.144351

AK and L v Croatia: ECHR 8 Jan 2013

ECHR Article 8-1
Respect for family life
Authorities’ failure to ensure legal representation of mentally disabled applicant in proceedings divesting her of parental rights and to inform her of adoption proceedings in respect of her son: violation
Facts – The first applicant is the mother of the second applicant L., who was born in 2008. Soon after his birth, L. was placed, with his mother’s consent, in a foster family in another town, on the grounds that his mother had no income and lived in a dilapidated property without heating. In May 2010 the first applicant was divested of her parental rights in respect of L., on the grounds that she had a mild mental disability and was not able to provide proper care to him. She applied for legal aid to lodge an appeal, but was only assigned a lawyer after the time-limit for appealing had expired. In October 2010 her lawyer applied to a municipal court for an order restoring the first applicant’s parental rights, but the application was dismissed because in the meantime L. had been adopted by third parties. The first applicant was not a party to the adoption proceedings and was not informed of them, as her consent was not needed because she had been divested of her parental rights.
Law – Article 8
(a) Standing of the first applicant to act on behalf of L. – In respect of any issues concerning the facts after the adoption became final, L.’s only representatives under national law were his adoptive parents. However, all issues concerning the severing of his ties with his biological mother before his adoption should be examined by the Court. It was in principle in a child’s interest to preserve its ties with its biological parents, save where weighty reasons existed to justify severing them. In the present proceedings, owing to his tender age, L. was not in a position to represent his interests. The first applicant was the only person able to argue on his behalf that severing the ties between them had also affected L.’s right to respect for his family life. The Government’s objection as regards the locus standi of the first applicant to represent L. in the proceedings before the Court had to be dismissed.
(b) Applicability – Although the child had been placed in a foster family soon after birth, the first applicant had continued to visit him. In the Court’s view there existed a bond between the first applicant and her son that amounted to ‘family life’. Article 8 was therefore applicable.
(c) Merits – The measures taken by the State amounted to interference with the applicants’ right to respect for their family life. The interference had a basis in domestic law and had been aimed at protecting the best interests of the child. The Court was not called upon to determine whether the adoption of the first applicant’s child was justified as such. Nor did it have to rule on the compliance with Article 8 of legislation which did not allow a parent divested of parental rights to participate in the adoption proceedings. Instead, the Court examined whether sufficient safeguards for the protection of the applicants’ private and family life had been provided at every stage of the process. The domestic legislation provided adequate safeguards as regards the interests of parents and their children in proceedings. However, despite the legal requirement and the authorities’ findings that the first applicant suffered from a mild mental disability, she had not been represented by a lawyer in the proceedings divesting her of parental rights. Given that she could not properly understand the full legal effect of such proceedings and adequately argue her case and given the importance of such proceedings for her right to respect for her family life, the national authorities should have ensured that the interests of both the first applicant and L. were adequately protected, in particular from the standpoint of preserving ties between them. While the Court could accept that the consent of the first applicant, who had been divested of her parental rights, was not necessary in the adoption proceedings, it nevertheless considered that where, as in Croatia, a national system allowed for parental rights to be restored, it was indispensable that a parent be given an opportunity to exercise that right before the child was put up for adoption. However, by not informing the first applicant about the adoption proceedings the national authorities had deprived her of the opportunity to seek restoration of her parental rights before the ties between her and her son had been finally severed by his adoption. She had thus been prevented from enjoying her right guaranteed by domestic law and had not been sufficiently involved in the decision-making process.
Conclusion: violation (unanimously).
Article 41: EUR 12,500 to the first applicant in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

Citations:

37956/11 – Legal Summary, [2013] ECHR 290

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8-1

Human Rights, Adoption, Legal Aid

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.472432

Lozinski v Ross: CA 15 Jan 1998

The defendant sought a stay of execution. There had been a partnership between the parties resulting in protracted litigation. As a result of costs orders already made there could be no financial benefit to the defendant in pursuing her case, and her legal aid had been withdrawn.
Held: The defendant had already failed to comply with unless orders, and her action had no prospect of success. Stay refused.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 27

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Company, Legal Aid

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143505

Regina 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.

Citations:

Times 26-Dec-1997, Gazette 28-Jan-1998, [1997] EWCA Civ 3043

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1974 2(10)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina 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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Company

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143442

Sandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: Admn 4 Feb 2013

The claimant was facing trial in Bali which would eventually lead to a sentence of death. She complained of inadequate legal assistance before and at the trial. She had been represented by a local lawyer, paid with funds (andpound;5,000) raised by her sister, but who (according to her) spoke little English and had no experience of capital defence litigation. Following her conviction, and by the time of the judicial review application, the consulate had put her in touch with Mr Agus, a local lawyer. He was the British Ambassador’s honorary legal adviser and was also a human rights specialist, who had acted in previous death penalty cases. He was willing to act for the appellant on a pro bono basis, subject to payment of his expenses, estimated at some andpound;2,600. She challenged the refusal of the respondent to provide that sum, both under common law and human rights law.
Held: The request was refused.
Gloster J said: ‘In my judgment it is manifestly clear on the facts of this case, that, at all relevant times, from the moment she was arrested, throughout the time she was in custody, throughout the trial process, and after her conviction when held in prison, the claimant was and remains under the authority and control of the Indonesian state and relevant criminal authorities. The mere fact that the consular officials provided her with advice and support, and that the [Foreign and Commonwealth Office] engaged in diplomatic representations, cannot be regarded as any kind of exertion of authority or control by agents of the United Kingdom so as to engage its responsibilities under the Convention.’

Judges:

Gloster, Nicola Davies JJ

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 168 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedZagorski and Baze, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and Others Admn 29-Nov-2010
The claimants, in the US awaiting execution for murders, challenged the permitting by the defendant for export of the chemical Sodium Thipental which would be used for their execution. The respondent said that its use in general anaesthesia practice . .
CitedAl-Skeini and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Jul-2011
(Grand Chamber) The exercise of jurisdiction, which is a threshold condition, is a necessary condition for a contracting state to be able to be held responsible for acts or omissions imputable to it which give rise to an allegation of the . .
CitedBankovic v Belgium ECHR 12-Dec-2001
(Grand Chamber) Air strikes were carried out by NATO forces against radio and television facilities in Belgrade on 23 April 1999. The claims of five of the applicants arose out of the deaths of relatives in this raid. The sixth claimed on his own . .
CitedX v United Kingdom ECHR 15-Dec-1977
(Commission) The British court had ordered a Jordanian father to return his daughter to England. The English mother contacted the British consulate in Amman asking it to ‘obtain the custody of her daughter from the Jordanian Court’. The Consulate . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromSandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 22-May-2013
The appellant, a British national and European citizen was in prison in Bali convicted of a criminal charge for which she might face the death penalty. Having insufficient funds she sought legal assistance from the respondent for her appeal, and now . .
At AdminSandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 16-Jul-2014
The appellant a British Citizen awaited execution in Singapore after conviction on a drugs charge. The only way she might get legal help for a further appeal would be if she was given legal aid by the respondent. She sought assistance both on Human . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Human Rights

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470811

Procurator Fiscal, Fort William v Mclean and Another: HCJ 11 Aug 2000

A rule which restricted the amount payable to a defendant to cover his legal fees in defending a case brought against him to pounds 550.00 was not an infringement of his human rights. To demonstrate a breach of the right to a fair trial, the defendant must show not only prejudice, but also some material disadvantage involving an actual and material risk of harm to his defence.

Citations:

Times 11-Aug-2000

Statutes:

Criminal Legal Aid (Fixed payments)(Scotland) Regulations 1999 (SI 1999 No 491)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Legal Aid, Human Rights

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.85053

Rayner v The Lord Chancellor: CA 9 Nov 2015

The claimant had been a defendant in an action. He came to be awarded substantial damages and costs, but the legally aided claimant was unlikely ever to be able to pay, and he sought payment of his costs under the Regulations. The respondent said that costs in respect of a period between the transfer of the legal id order from one firm to another was not recoverable.
Held: The appeal succeeded.

Judges:

McCombe, Gloster, Underhill LJJ

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 1124

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRayner v The Lord Chancellor ChD 2-Dec-2013
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.554532

Rayner v The Lord Chancellor: ChD 2 Dec 2013

Judges:

Nicholas Strauss QC sitting as a deputy judge of the Chancery Division

Citations:

[2013] WLR(D) 467, [2013] EWHC 3878 (Ch), [2014] 1 Costs LR 59, [2014] 1 WLR 677

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Community Legal Service (Cost Protection) Regulations 2000 5(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromRayner v The Lord Chancellor CA 9-Nov-2015
The claimant had been a defendant in an action. He came to be awarded substantial damages and costs, but the legally aided claimant was unlikely ever to be able to pay, and he sought payment of his costs under the Regulations. The respondent said . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.522671

Oliver Fisher (A Firm) v Legal Services Commission: Admn 10 May 2002

Gilliatt A solicitors’ firm had been paid for work done in a case by the Legal Services Commission. The LSC had a right to a statutory charge against a property which had been preserved as a result of the proceedings. The solicitors should have reported to the LSC that they had recovered the property by December 1999. In February 2000 the firm applied to have the legal aid certificate discharged. It was not until August 2000 that they made the report to the LSC about the recovery of property giving rise to the statutory charge. The LSC did not actually receive the report until mid September. The LSC then applied to register a caution against the property. In the meantime the litigant had put the property on the market and a prospective purchaser had lodged an official search with the land registry. The upshot was that the purchaser’s application to register title had priority over the LSC’s application to register a charge. The property was transferred to the purchasers. By the time the LSC were told their charge had not been registered, the solicitors had been paid and the litigant had been paid by the purchaser. The LSC then tried to claw back the money paid out for costs from other sums claimed by the solicitors in respect of different cases.
Held: Despite the fact that the solicitors had not done everything they should have done promptly, there was no actual power, on a construction of the regulations on the part of the LSC to take back the money.
Scott Baker J said: ‘[Counsel for the Commission] submits that . . Section 4(1)(b) of the Legal Aid Act 1988 gives the defendants a statutory power to operate a running account. This however does not in my judgment give a right to relocate or move money that has been earned and paid in case ‘A’ to case ‘B’ or to recoup money.’

Judges:

Mr Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1017 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 4(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Legal Professions, Professional Negligence

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.172254

Philcox v Civil Aviation Authority: CA 5 Dec 1996

Judges:

Staughton LJ, Millett LJ, Ward LJ

Citations:

[1996] EWCA Civ 1117

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoPhilcox v Civil Aviation Authority CA 8-Jun-1995
Civil Aviation Authority’s role is for the protection of the pubic generally, not to look after individuals. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Costs

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.140984

In Re O (A Minor) (Costs:Liability of Legal Aid Board); orse Re O (A Minor) (Legal Aid Costs): CA 25 Nov 1996

Grandparents should have conceded at an early stage in the Court of Appeal that an order made by the judge in proceedings relating to their grandchild had been made without jurisdiction.
Held: The court considered the procedures for applying for costs for an unassisted party in children proceedings.

Citations:

Times 25-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 936, [1997] 1 FCR 159

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Children

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.82085

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)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Costs, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.79884

DS and Others (Children): FD 31 May 2012

The court gave guidance on legal aid arrangement for the funding of supporting expert evidence in care applications.
Held: The court gave the following guidance: ‘i) The words ‘the cost thereof is deemed to be a necessary and proper disbursement on [a named individual’s] public funding certificate’ (or words to equivalent effect) should no longer be used when the court orders a report from an expert. The words do not bind the LSC or, for that matter anybody else. In addition, there must be doubt about the court’s power to make such an order. It is, in my judgment, far better to follow the words of the Regulations, particularly if the court is being asked to approve rates in excess of those allowed by the Funding Order. A copy of such an order is attached at the end of this judgment.
ii) The test for expert evidence will shortly import the word ‘necessary’. The question which the court will have to ask itself is whether or not the report of the expert is necessary for the resolution of the case. FPR rule 25.1 will shortly be amended to insert the word ‘necessary’ for ‘reasonably required’ and there will be a new Practice Direction.
iii) It is the court which makes the order for the instruction of an expert, and this responsibility neither can nor should be delegated to the parties. It is of the essence of good case management that the court should identify the issues on which it wants the expert to report. It would thus be helpful and important for the tribunal to be able to say – if it is the case and the hard pressed Tribunal with a long list has had the time – that it has read all the (relevant) papers.
iv) If the court takes the view that an expert’s report is necessary for the resolution of the case, it should say so, and give its reasons. This can be done by a preamble to the order, or by a short judgment, delivered at dictation speed or inserted by the parties with the judge’s approval. I have considered this point carefully, and have come to the conclusion that this does not impose an undue burden either on the court or the profession.
v) There is no substitute for reasons. A consent order is still an order of the court: it is a judicial decision and must be supported by reasons. Equally, a decision by the LSC is a decision. It too should be supported by reasons.
vi) ‘Reasons’ in circumstances such as these need not be lengthy or elaborate. They must, however, explain to anyone reading them why the decision maker has reached the conclusion he or she has particularly if the expert is seeking to be paid at rates which are higher than those set out in the table in Schedule 6 of the Funding Order
vii) Speed is of the essence in proceedings relating to children. An application for prior authority must be made at the earliest opportunity and, once again, must be carefully drafted and supported by reasons.
viii) By like token, it behoves the LSC to deal with such applications promptly and, particularly if the application is being refused, or only granted to a limited extent, to give its reasons for its decision. Once again, the reasons can be concise. Of course the solicitor seeking prior authority can go ahead regardless, and instruct the expert at the rates the expert demands, but such a suggestion, in reality, is unreal. The expert’s contract is with the solicitor, and if he or she does not recover the expert’s costs from the LSC, it is the solicitor who is liable. Given the exiguous rates of remuneration, this is a risk no solicitor is willing to take, particularly where the client is impecunious.
ix) Similar considerations to those set out above apply to any challenge to the LSC’s ruling.
x) If a case is urgent, it should be so marked and the reasons for its urgency explained.
xi) Courts should familiarise themselves with Part 25 of the FPR and with Practice Direction 25A which supplements it. Specifically, they should be aware of paragraph 4.3(h) or its equivalent when amended which provides that the person wishing to instruct an expert must explain to the court why the expert evidence proposed cannot be given by Social Services undertaking a core assessment or by the Children’s Guardian in accordance with their respective statutory duties. The Rule and the Practice Direction are being revised to make them (it is to be hoped) more practical and ‘user friendly’. Practitioners should look out, in due course, for the amendments. ‘

Judges:

Sir Nicholas Wall P

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1442 (Fam), [2012] 1 WLR 3098, [2012] Fam Law 1078

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

EndorsedCalderdale 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:

CitedT, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Aid Agency and Others Admn 26-Apr-2013
In care proceedings, an order had been made for the preparation of an expert report. The legally aided children applied to the defendant for assistance. It allowed a sum less than the minimum figure set by the expert company as a fee for doing the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.460530

Circuit 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 the Legal Aid Board should be careful in supporting such contrived litigation.

Judges:

Lord Justice Staughton, Lord Justice Simon Brown and Lord Justice Thorpe

Citations:

Gazette 01-May-1996, Times 05-Apr-1996

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925 136(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedJoyce v Sengupta and Another CA 31-Jul-1992
The defendant published an article accusing the plaintiff of theft. Not having funds to launch a claim in libel, the plaintiff obtained legal aid to claim in malicious falsehood. She now appealed against a strike out of that claim.
Held: A . .
AppliedStein 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 . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromNorglen 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.

Litigation Practice, Legal Aid

Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.79137

Regina 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.

Citations:

Times 11-Aug-1993, Independent 24-Sep-1993

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 34

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Legal Professions

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87216

Middleton v Middleton: CA 10 Jan 1994

Legal Aid Act gives no power to extend time for filing affidavit under regulations.

Citations:

Ind Summary 10-Jan-1994

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromMiddleton 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. . .

Cited by:

Appealed toMiddleton 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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.83699

Keller v Keller and Legal Aid Board: CA 21 Oct 1994

The standard practice of not awarding costs in children cases overrides the possibility of making a hardship order from Landlord. Costs orders are unusual in custody disputes and no order was to be made against the Legal Aid Board in favour of an unassisted party.
Neill LJ said: ‘In the last decade, however, it has become the general practice in proceedings relating to the custody and care and control of children to make no order as to the costs of the proceedings except in exceptional circumstances’, but it was ‘unnecessary and undesirable to try to limit or place into rigid categories the cases which a court might regard as suitable for such an award’.

Judges:

Neill LJ

Citations:

Times 28-Oct-1994, Independent 21-Oct-1994, [1995] 1 FLR 259

Statutes:

Legal Aid Act 1988 18(4)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCorner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 1-Mar-2005
The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the . .
CitedRe S (A Child) SC 25-Mar-2015
The Court was asked as to the proper approach to ordering the unsuccessful party to pay the costs of a successful appeal in cases about the care and upbringing of children. It arises in the specific context of a parent’s successful appeal to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Children

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.82702

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

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Contempt of Court

Updated: 21 October 2022; Ref: scu.88000

Ashman v Severn Trent Water Ltd and National Rivers Authority: CA 26 Jun 1997

The solicitor appealed against a refusal of the court to allow him to come off the record in acting for the plaintiff. The court had said that since the plaintiff was legally aided, the solicitor must first deal with the Legal Aid certificate.

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Professions, Legal Aid

Updated: 19 October 2022; Ref: scu.142377

Leeds City Council v Price and Others: CA 2 Feb 2012

The council had sought repossession of land occupied by the defendant gypsies. The council won its case and an order for costs in the House of Lords. The defendants had been legally aided, and the council had sought payment by the Community Legal Services Fund.

Judges:

Aikens, Tomplinson LJJ, Dame Janet Smith

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 59

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450532

Lord Chancellor v Ian Henery Solicitors Ltd: QBD 8 Dec 2011

The court heard a challenge to arrangements within the graduated fees scheme for payment of defence lawyers, and in particular ‘when does a trial begin?’ and whether a case should be paid as a ‘trial’ or as a ‘cracked trial’. The trial had been arranged and brought on, but after the jury was sworn, the judge allowed additional counts, and eventually the case was stood down. Under the payments scheme the arrangements were more lucrative to an advocate if the trial was said to be cracked, but to litigators if not.

Judges:

Spencer J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 3246 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Defence Service (Funding) Order 2007

Citing:

CitedLord Chancellor v Rees and others QBD 19-Dec-2008
Sir Charles Gray considered an appeal against the findings of a costs judge, saying: ‘it appears to me that it is incumbent on the Lord Chancellor in any appeal to the High Court to identify some question of law or principle which arises, since the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Legal Professions

Updated: 01 October 2022; Ref: scu.449897

Challender and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Legal Services Commission: Admn 29 Apr 2004

Judges:

Richards J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 925 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoRegina on the Application of Challender, and Morris v The Legal Services Commission Admn 29-Apr-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid

Updated: 22 September 2022; Ref: scu.196099

The Lord Chancellor v Alexander Johnson and Co Solicitors and Another: QBD 29 Jul 2011

The court was asked whether the respondents, a firm of solicitors and a barrister, are in respect of acting on behalf of Aaron Phillips in certain criminal proceedings entitled to fees payable under the Litigators’ Graduated Fee Scheme (GFS) or under the Very High Costs Cases (VHCC) scheme. The issue involves a point of interpretation of the Criminal Defence Services (Funding) Order 2007 as amended.

Judges:

Davis J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2113 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442461

Lumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board: Admn 20 Jan 2014

Four barristers challenged, by a judicial review, a decision by which the LSB approved an application proposed by the BSB jointly with two other approved regulators, the SRA and IPS, to introduce the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates

Judges:

Sir Brian Leveson P QBD, Bean, Cranston JJ

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 28 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRondel v Worsley HL 1967
Need for Advocate’s Immunity from Negligence
The appellant had obtained the services of the respondent barrister to defend him on a dock brief, and alleged that the respondent had been negligent in the conduct of his defence.
Held: The House considered the immunity from suit of . .
CitedSaif Ali v Sydney Mitchell and Co (a Firm) HL 1978
Extent of Counsel’s Immunity in Negligence
The House considered the extent of a barrister’s immunity from action in negligence, and particularly whether it covered pre-trial acts or omissions in connection with civil proceedings.
Held: A barrister’s immunity from suit extended only to . .
CitedArthur JS Hall and Co (A Firm) v Simons; Barratt v Woolf Seddon (A Firm); Harris v Schofield Roberts and Hill (A Firm) HL 20-Jul-2000
Clients sued their solicitors for negligence. The solicitors responded by claiming that, when acting as advocates, they had the same immunities granted to barristers.
Held: The immunity from suit for negligence enjoyed by advocates acting in . .
CitedOliver v Symons CA 15-Mar-2012
The parties disputed the extent of a right of way, the claimant appealing against the rejection of his claim for ‘swing space’ alongside the right of way.
Held: The appeal failed. Elias LJ said that the ‘argument for swing space fails. That is . .
CitedAl Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others SC 13-Jul-2011
The claimant pursued a civil claim for damages, alleging complicity of the respondent in his torture whilst in the custody of foreign powers. The respondent sought that certain materials be available to the court alone and not to the claimant or the . .
See AlsoLumsdon and Others v Legal Services Board Admn 30-Oct-2013
The claimants, practising barristers and members of the Criminal Bar Association sought a declaration that the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates approved by the defendant was unlawful. . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromLumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board and Others CA 7-Oct-2014
The claimants sought to challenge the respondent’s decision to introduce the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates.
Held: Arden LJ and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury MR analysed the cases as yielding a ‘manifestly inappropriate’ test. They then . .
At First InstanceLumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board SC 24-Jun-2015
The appellant, barristers and solicitors, challenged the respondent’s approval of alterations to their regulatory arrangements, under Part 3 of Schedule 4 to the 2007 Act. The alterations gave effect to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Legal Professions

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.519976

JB DB and JWDWB v The Authority Reporter for Edinburgh: SCS 22 Jun 2011

Citations:

[2011] ScotCS CSIH – 39, [2011] CSIH 39, 2012 SCLR 187, 2011 Fam LR 96, 2012 SC 23, 2011 SLT 1194, 2011 GWD 22-510

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

CitedNJDB v JEG and Another SC 23-May-2012
Mother and father disputed whether the father should be allowed contact with their child S. Court orders had been made for residential and non-residential contact, but there were difficulties and the order for contact was reversed on the basis that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Children, Legal Aid

Updated: 15 September 2022; Ref: scu.441328

Carse v Carse: QBNI 19 Dec 2000

‘Applications for review of Taxing Master’s decisions given in the two separate sets of proceedings. In both cases the petitioners were legally aided parties whose costs fell to be taxed under the relevant provisions. In both sets of proceedings the solicitors and counsel are aggrieved by the Taxing Master’s decisions which significantly reduced the solicitors’ costs and counsel’s fees allowed in respect of work carried out in those proceedings.’

Judges:

Girvan J

Citations:

[2000] NIQB 62

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Costs, Legal Aid

Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.202123

Jr Jones Solicitors v Legal Services Commission: ChD 16 Dec 2010

The claimants sought a declaration to the effect that their failure to obtain an immigration contract following a tendering process for the carrying out of publicly funded work was unlawful.

Judges:

Purle QC J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3671 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Professions, Legal Aid

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430494

Legal Services Commission v Pugh (Charges and Charging Orders): LRA 21 Dec 2007

LRA Claimant with legal aid obtains a partial right of way to her property in settlement of a dispute as to her rights of access. Legal Services Commission not entitled to charge over her property under section 10(7) of the Access to Justice Act 1999.

Citations:

[2007] EWLandRA 2006 – 1672

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 10(7)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Legal Aid

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.429581

Director of Legal Aid Casework, Regina (on The Application of) v Crown Court At Southwark: Admn 9 Feb 2021

A question of the proper interpretation of Regulation 26 of the 2013 Regulations and, subject to that question of interpretation, second, the proper application of that Regulation to the circumstances of this particular case.

Citations:

[2021] EWHC 397 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Legal Aid (Contribution Orders) Regulations 2013

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid

Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.658884

Legal Services Commission v Humberstone, Regina (On The Application of): CA 21 Dec 2010

Appeal against successful judicial review of refusal of legal aid for mother of deceased at inquest.
Held: ‘article 2 will be engaged in the much narrower range of cases where there is at least an arguable case that the state has been in breach of its substantive duty to protect life; in such cases the obligation is proactively to initiate a thorough investigation into the circumstances of the death.’

Judges:

Maurice Kay VP CA, Smith, Leveson LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1479, [2011] 1 WLR 1460, (2011) 118 BMLR 79, [2010] Inquest LR 221, [2011] Med LR 56, [2011] HRLR 12, [2011] ACD 51, [2011] UKHRR 8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 6, European Convention on Human Rights 82

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromHumberstone, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Commission Admn 13-Apr-2010
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision of the Defendant not to recommend that her application for public funding for representation at the inquest enquiring into the death of her son be granted. . .

Cited by:

CitedLetts, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Chancellor and Another Admn 20-Feb-2015
Application for judicial review concerning the criteria applied by the Legal Aid Agency to determine whether relatives of a deceased should be granted legal aid for representation at an inquest into a death which has arisen in circumstances which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Coroners, Human Rights

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427369

Brawley v Marczynski and Another: CA 21 Oct 2002

The defendants appealed an award of costs on an indemnity basis against them in the favour of a legally aided claimant.
Held: Indemnity costs were often intended to indicate disapproval of a party’s behaviour in an action, and were awarded in several and discretionary circumstances. It was not an objection of principle to say that a legally aided litigant would not recover the difference between standard and indemnity costs, and that therefore indemnity costs should not be awarded in favour of a legally aided claimant. Appeal refused.

Judges:

Aldous, Tuckey, Longmore LLJ

Citations:

[2003] 1 WLR 813, Times 07-Nov-2002, Gazette 09-Jan-2003, Gazette 16-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1453, [2003] 3 Costs LR 325, [2003] CP Rep 15, [2002] 4 All ER 1067, [2003] CPLR 241

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedFrary v Frary CA 1993
A spouse’s wealthy cohabitant, who had been ordered to produce evidence not just as to the support provided by her (or him) to the spouse but as to her (or his) overall resources may be able successfully to invoke the courts jurisdiction to protect . .
CitedBurgess v Burgess CA 11-Nov-1996
. .
CitedKiam v MGN Ltd CA 28-Jan-2002
Where a court regards a jury award in a defamation case as excessive, a ‘proper’ award can be substituted for it is not whatever sum court thinks appropriate, wholly uninfluenced by jury’s view, but the highest award which a jury could reasonably . .
CitedReid Minty (a firm) v Taylor CA 2002
New CPR govern Indemnity Costs awards
The defendant had successfully defended the main claim and now appealed against the refusal of an order for costs on an indemnity basis even though judge thought that the claimants had behaved unreasonably. He had said that some conduct deserving of . .

Cited by:

CitedSargeant, and Sargeant v Macepark (Whittlebury) Limited ChD 8-Jun-2004
The landlord granted the tenant a licence to make alterations to the property, but imposed conditions on the use to be made of the resulting premises. The tenant objected.
Held: The landlord was entitled when granting consent to take into . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Civil Procedure Rules, Legal Aid

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.177722

Humberstone, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Commission: Admn 13 Apr 2010

The claimant sought judicial review of the decision of the Defendant not to recommend that her application for public funding for representation at the inquest enquiring into the death of her son be granted.

Judges:

Hickinbottom J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 760 (Admin), [2010] ACD 51, [2010] Inquest LR 64

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromLegal Services Commission v Humberstone, Regina (On The Application of) CA 21-Dec-2010
Appeal against successful judicial review of refusal of legal aid for mother of deceased at inquest.
Held: ‘article 2 will be engaged in the much narrower range of cases where there is at least an arguable case that the state has been in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Coroners, Legal Aid

Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408638

Regina v Lea (Attorney-General’s Reference No 82 of 2000); Regina v Shatwell: CACD 28 Jan 2002

The defendants had been tried in cases where the prosecution had employed leading counsel. The defendants had been refused similar representation. They complained that this created an inequality of arms, and an unfair trial under Human Rights law. The question also arose as to the maximum sentence allowable after a re-trial ordered by the Court of Appeal.
Held: There was no interference with the right to a fair trial. The defendant had been properly and competently represented. As to sentence, the defendant had been first convicted, and sentenced to three and a half years imprisonment. The conviction was set aside and a re-trial ordered. The Act said that no greater sentence could be imposed on a second trial than on the first, but the Crown appealed the sentence as unduly lenient. Though cumbersome, the right procedure was for the Crown to make such an appeal on the first conviction. That could be heard before the appeal against conviction. The position on any subsequent trial would then be safeguarded.

Judges:

Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Aikens and Mr Justice Pitchford

Citations:

Times 28-Feb-2002

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 6, Criminal Justice Act 1988 36

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Legal Aid, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.167670

Regina v Oates: CACD 25 Apr 2002

The applicant had sought and been refused legal aid to support legal representation at a full oral hearing on her renewed application for leave to appeal against her conviction. She argued that the refusal of legal aid denied her human rights.
Held: The legal aid system assisted her at trial, on advice with regard to an appeal, and on the first written application for leave to appeal. Where that application had been refused, there was nothing in human rights law to require legal aid to be extended further.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rose, Mr Justice McKinnon and Mr Justice Pool

Citations:

Times 20-May-2002, Gazette 30-May-2002

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1968 31, European Convention on Human Rights 6.3(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Human Rights

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.171184