Site icon swarb.co.uk

In Re Hickman and Rose (Solicitors) (Wasted Costs Order) (No 10 of 1999): CACD 19 Apr 2000

After a trial was aborted, the solicitors, acting on counsel’s advice made an application for bail under the rules applying to the custody time limits. An unreported case had already decided the point, namely that once the jury had ben sworn, the limits ceased to apply. Though counsel, once told of the decision sought to withdraw the application, the solicitors were ordered to pay the costs of the application personally.
Held: The order was set aside. It could not be said that the solicitors had acted improperly unreasonably or negligently. On such appeals it is important for those applying to make available transcripts of the events at the lower court.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke Mr Justice Kay And The Recorder Of Bristol His Honour Judge Dyer

Citations:

Times 03-May-2000

Statutes:

Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 19A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRidehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd CA 26-Jan-1994
Guidance for Wasted Costs Orders
Guidance was given on the circumstances required for the making of wasted costs orders against legal advisers. A judge invited to make an order arising out of an advocate’s conduct of court proceedings must make full allowance for the fact that an . .
CitedIn the Matter of an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Subjiciendum and In the Matter of Bozkurt Admn 3-Oct-1997
Custody time limits cease to apply once a jury has been sworn. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81934

Exit mobile version