header-logo header-logo

17 October 2025 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 8135 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Civil way , Housing
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 17 October 2025

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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll