header-logo header-logo

Civil way: 17 October 2025

17 October 2025 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 8135 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Civil way , Housing
printer mail-detail
Judge costs MoJ £3K; latest FPR PD update; new housing hazard law

TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEPT WAITING

When the Pensions Ombudsman makes an award for non-financial injustice caused by maladministration, how much are you likely to score? Nothing in a nominal injustice case. Otherwise, £500 if significant; £1,000 if serious; £2,000 if severe; and more than £2,000 if exceptional.

In Mr T v Ministry of Justice and XPS Pensions Consulting Ltd (CAS-45233-Y4G1), the applicant was a fee-paid tribunal judge and a member of the fee-paid judicial pension scheme. He received a benefit statement which was wrong, and delivered to the administrators XPS over 300 pages of documents to show why. It was all sorted—after six years. He sought £10,000 for exceptional distress and inconvenience, was offered £1,000 by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), which was then increased to £1,500, and was ultimately awarded £3,000 by an ombudsman’s adjudicator, which T maintained was insufficient. His award, he claimed, should reflect the time spent by him as a result of the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll