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 costs application and was not bound by it.
Held: The order for payment of the costs was revoked. But for the various Regulations, there was no power to recover costs from the LSC. The purported notice given by the Council was out of time and did not meet th enecessary requirements. The Order for payment obtained by the Council from the court ‘ was obtained as a result of a without notice application which did not contain full and frank disclosure by the Council of the dispute between the Council and the LSC. ‘
Behrens J
[2011] EWHC 849 (QB)
Bailii
Access to Justice Act 1999 11, Community Legal Service (Costs Protection) Regulations 2000 5, Community Legal Service (Costs) Regulations 2000 9
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – 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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Legal Aid, Costs
Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.431737
