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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll