header-logo header-logo

01 September 2016
Issue: 7712 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Fees hike bites business

Bar Council: small businesses have been priced out of court

Recently released official statistics show that small businesses seeking money owed to them have been priced out of court by fee increases of more than 600%, says the Bar Council.

In March 2015, the Ministry of Justice increased court fees for money claims. It imposed a 5% fee on organisations and individuals bringing claims worth between £10,000 and £200,000. Claimants were obliged to pay fees of £10,000 upfront for a claim of £200,000, a 660% increase on the previous fee of £1,315.

Now, the full impact of the fee increases has started to “bite” and the courts risk “becoming out of bounds” for many small businesses pursuing debtors, the Bar Council says. Figures from the Registry Trust reveal that there were only 42,091 county court judgments (CCJs) against businesses in England and Wales in the first half of 2016—a 19% drop on the previous year. The total value of CCJs fell 12% to £149m. In the High Court, the total number of judgments fell 50% compared with the first half of 2015 to 33.

Chantal-Aimée Doerries QC, Chairman of the Bar, says: “Small businesses seeking debt owed to them by customers, who are often other businesses they supply, can turn to CCJs as a last resort to get the money owed to them, but by increasing court fees the government has cut off those small businesses’ only real and last hope of getting that money, which is vital given how important cash-flow is to SMEs.” Doerries called on the new government to back access to justice for small businesses by reviewing the impact of the fee hike.

The fee rise was fiercely opposed last year by senior members of the judiciary, Law Society, Bar Council, CILEx, and representative groups for both claimant and defendant lawyers.

Issue: 7712 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll