header-logo header-logo

Unsatisfactory & unfair?

24 May 2018 / Alec Samuels
Issue: 7794 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail
nlj_7794_samuels

Defendants’ costs orders: the principles, by Alec Samuels

The defendant was acquitted. He was ineligible for legal aid. His costs were considerable. He applies for a defendant’s costs order (DCO) from central funds (not the Crown Prosecution Service or the police). The matter lies within the discretion of the judge. We live in an age of austerity. If costs are awarded they are capped at legal aid rates. Factors the judge may take into account include the importance of the charge, whether the defendant brought suspicion on himself, whether he misled the prosecution into thinking that the case against him was stronger than it really was, or whether he withheld relevant information. Would an order be appropriate, reasonable and just? The Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, as amended, ss 16 and 16A, as amended by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO), s 62 and sch 7. R (Henderson) v Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EWHC 130 (Admin), [2015] 1 Cr App

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