header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 July 2009 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 7378 / Categories: Features , Civil way
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 17 July 2009

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Ritzy fees

Civil and family court fees went up—again—on 13 July 2009. The Civil Proceedings Fees (Amendment) Order 2009 (SI2009/1498) and Family Proceedings Fees (Amendment) Order 2009 (SI2009/1499) are to blame with considerable help from the Ministry of Justice and Treasury. By way of example, a claimant not entitled to fee remission who has to endure a defended hearing to obtain judgment for £100 and who puts in the bailiff, will now shell out a cool £155 on court fees alone (ignoring an on-line or bulk centre discount).

Enforcement ouch

Enforcement takes the biggest hit. In civil and family cases a warrant of execution, charging order (oh so popular), third party debt order (still a garnishee in family parlance) or application for an attachment of earnings order will attract a fee of £100 each (and more than one form of enforcement may be concurrently pursued). This is a whopping increase of generally around double (except for High Court civil).The warrant of execution fee (albeit a reduced £70 for bulk issue cases) replaces

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll