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
