Skip to content

swarb.co.uk

May the law be with you – lex vobiscum

  • Law
    • More Recent Cases
    • e-Legal Gathering
    • Case Layout
    • FAQ
    • Searching
    • Areas of Law
    • law index
    • Courts
    • Reports
    • Judges
    • Case Names
  • Privacy
    • GDPR – Overall
    • Anonymity Orders
    • GDPR – Request to be ‘Forgotten’
    • Privacy – Users
    • GDPR – Content
    • GDPR – Legitimate Interests
    • Lawfulness of processing
    • Purposes Limitation
    • Cookie Policy
    • GDPR -Accuracy
    • GDPR – Resources
    • California Consumer Privacy Act
  • About
    • What we do
    • Contact
    • Development
  • Advertising
    • Advertising
    • Donate
    • Statistics
  • Registration

Practice Direction (Crown Court: Counsel): CACD 25 Jan 1995

Practice Direction on power of Judge to order legal aid for more than one counsel.
Times 25-Jan-1995
Legal Aid in Criminal and Care proceedings (General)(Amendment No 2) Regulations 1994 (1994 No 31)
England and Wales

Updated: 26 March 2021; Ref: scu.84874

Posted on March 26, 2021March 26, 2021 by dlsPosted in Legal AidTagged Legal Aid

Post navigation

Previous Previous post: Ministry of Defence (Central Government): ICO 6 Nov 2019
Next Next post: Regina v Belaifa (Idis Ali): CACD 3 Apr 1996

Areas of Law:

  • Administrative (1,122)
  • Adoption (461)
  • Agency (620)
  • Agriculture (773)
  • Animals (305)
  • Arbitration (1,262)
  • Armed Forces (358)
  • Banking (1,416)
  • Benefits (3,521)
  • Capital Gains Tax (486)
  • Charity (383)
  • Child Support (309)
  • Children (5,385)
  • Civil Procedure Rules (319)
  • Commercial (1,423)
  • Commonwealth (3,082)
  • Company (3,025)
  • Constitutional (949)
  • Construction (1,173)
  • Consumer (740)
  • Contempt of Court (851)
  • Contract (6,114)
  • Coroners (421)
  • Corporation Tax (680)
  • Costs (3,553)
  • Crime (8,398)
  • Criminal Evidence (633)
  • Criminal Practice (3,315)
  • Criminal Sentencing (2,882)
  • Customs and Excise (1,686)
  • Damages (2,486)
  • Defamation (1,543)
  • Development (1)
  • Discrimination (2,630)
  • Ecclesiastical (307)
  • Education (1,063)
  • Elections (224)
  • Employment (12,725)
  • Environment (820)
  • Equity (961)
  • Estoppel (334)
  • European (12,960)
  • Evidence (517)
  • Extradition (1,589)
  • Family (2,883)
  • Financial Services (1,014)
  • Health (1,522)
  • Health and Safety (459)
  • Health Professions (1,928)
  • Housing (2,005)
  • Human Rights (19,661)
  • Immigration (56,354)
  • Income Tax (3,224)
  • Information (15,624)
  • Inheritance Tax (178)
  • Insolvency (3,044)
  • Insurance (1,249)
  • Intellectual Property (13,534)
  • International (956)
  • Ireland (18)
  • Judicial Review (584)
  • Jurisdiction (1,047)
  • Jury (1,775)
  • Land (5,294)
  • Landlord and Tenant (15,657)
  • Legal Aid (391)
  • Legal Professions (1,957)
  • Licensing (594)
  • Limitation (1,065)
  • Litigation Practice (7,051)
  • Local Government (1,630)
  • Magistrates (758)
  • Media (1,141)
  • Natural Justice (322)
  • Negligence (1,336)
  • News (49)
  • Northern Ireland (1,758)
  • Nuisance (460)
  • Personal Injury (2,907)
  • Planning (3,239)
  • Police (1,549)
  • Prisons (1,248)
  • Professional Negligence (1,619)
  • Rating (670)
  • Registered Land (823)
  • Road Traffic (1,211)
  • Scotland (16,745)
  • Stamp Duty (187)
  • Taxes – Other (2,256)
  • Taxes Management (1,381)
  • Torts – Other (2,759)
  • Transport (2,049)
  • Trusts (1,473)
  • Undue Influence (152)
  • Utilities (477)
  • VAT (5,534)
  • Vicarious Liability (248)
  • Wales (16)
  • Wills and Probate (1,781)

Recent Posts

  • Aa, Re Application for Judicial Review: AIT 22 Feb 2022
  • HU101762019: AIT 31 Jan 2022
  • PA049482019: AIT 29 Mar 2022
  • Taylor, Re Application for Judicial Review: QBNI 18 Dec 2020
  • NHS London (Decision Notice): ICO 3 Dec 2007
  • PA030602020: AIT 27 Jan 2022
  • LC v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (DLA): UTAA 21 Jan 2015
  • HU044922020: AIT 29 Mar 2022
  • PA114062016: AIT 27 Jan 2022
  • Antunes And Pires And Ferreira Alves No. 3 v Portugal: ECHR 3 Jun 2010
  • Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 10 Nov 2008
  • Jones v Jones: 1 Jun 1858
  • Krzak v Poland: ECHR 6 Apr 2004
  • HU040782019: AIT 22 Mar 2022
  • PA014632020: AIT 5 Jan 2022
  • HU076742019 and HU076782019: AIT 25 Jan 2022
  • PA039872020: AIT 9 Mar 2022
  • Hertfordshire County Council (Decision Notice): ICO 25 Aug 2005
  • HU017622020: AIT 28 Jan 2022
  • HU078112018: AIT 25 Jan 2022
  • NHS North of Tyne (Decision Notice): ICO 26 Oct 2011
  • IA012992020: AIT 6 Jan 2022
  • PA023982020: AIT 9 Mar 2022
  • Howes v Howes: 21 Feb 1839
  • PA129382017: AIT 24 Feb 2022
  • Vale of Glamorgan Council (Decision Notice): ICO 10 May 2010
  • Yayla v Turkey: ECHR 21 Jul 2005
  • IA007162020: AIT 26 Jan 2022
  • HU067612020: AIT 9 Mar 2022
  • EA028202020: AIT 29 Mar 2022
  • EA005392020 and EA005402020: AIT 26 Jan 2022
  • Mehmet Yigit v Turkey (No. 3): ECHR 21 Jul 2005
  • EA022202020: AIT 25 Jan 2022
  • EA053872020: AIT 6 Jan 2022
  • Ralcon Research Llc and Another v Ctavis Group PTC EHF and Others: PatC 23 Apr 2021
  • HU099022019: AIT 1 Mar 2022
  • PA093602019: AIT 24 Jan 2022
  • PA021412018 and HU119742019: AIT 9 Mar 2022
  • HU072092019: AIT 9 Mar 2022
  • Cider of Sweden Limited v Revenue and Customs (Procedure : Other): FTTTx 8 Apr 2022
  • PA028512020: AIT 8 Feb 2022
  • Abram Steamship Co Ltd v Abram: 1925
  • West Devon Borough Council (Decision Notice): ICO 22 Jan 2007
  • HU074142020: AIT 19 Jan 2022
  • Kledzic v Poland: ECHR 23 Sep 2003
  • Discovery Land Company, Llc and Others v Axis Specialty Europe Se: ComC 30 Jul 2021
  • EA056502018 and PA083812017: AIT 11 Feb 2022
  • Gransaul and Ferreira v The Queen: PC 9 Apr 1979
  • PA004662020: AIT 22 Mar 2022
  • PA059332018: AIT 9 Mar 2022

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
swarb.co.uk is published by David Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse West Yorkshire HD6 2AG. Tel: 0795 457 9992, 01484 380326 or email at david@swarb.co.uk

IMPORTANT:This site reports and summarizes cases. We do not provide advice. Before making any decision, you must read the full case report and take professional advice as appropriate. Only full case reports are accepted in court.

Proudly powered by WordPress Theme: Colinear by Automattic.