header-logo header-logo

Costs assessment dispute escalates

08 September 2020
Issue: 7901 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Legal aid focus , Legal services
printer mail-detail
A judicial review has been lodged against the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) for its decision to move legal aid cost assessments in-house

The Law Society, which launched the case last week, claims the LAA failed to consult the representative bodies, and the LAA may not have enough qualified staff and resources in-house to manage the change. It points to a potential conflict of interest where the LAA is assessing larger bills as it is also the paying party, and argues the costs appeals process is not properly independent as it is controlled by the LAA which also appoints and pays for independent costs assessors.

Law Society president Simon Davis said: ‘Cost assessments are vital in ensuring that when legal aid practitioners send a bill it is carefully scrutinised and they are properly paid for their work.

‘For years, legal aid cost assessments over the value of £2,500 have been conducted by the courts and bills under £2,500 have been assessed by the LAA―a system which has worked well for practitioners and clients alike. Calculating cost assessments can be a complicated process which requires a level of skill and experience, and sufficient time.’

The LAA announced in June that it would bring all assessments in-house from 17 August, on the basis this would speed up the process as claims would no longer need to go before the courts, resulting in faster payments for firms already struggling with cash flow issues during the COVID-19 pandemic. It said it had consulted with ‘representative bodies’ on amendments to the cost assessment guidance.

Davis said the proceedings have been issued on ‘a protective basis’ and invited the LAA to discuss the issue.

The Ministry of Justice was unable to comment while legal proceedings were ongoing.

 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Arc Pensions Law—Ian D’Costa

Arc Pensions Law—Ian D’Costa

Pensions firm welcomes legal director in London

Shakespeare Martineau—Jonathan Warren

Shakespeare Martineau—Jonathan Warren

Real estate disputes team strengthened by London partner hire

Morgan Lewis—Christian Tuddenham

Morgan Lewis—Christian Tuddenham

Litigation partner joins disputes team in London

NEWS
Government plans for offender ‘restriction zones’ risk creating ‘digital cages’ that blur punishment with surveillance, warns Henrietta Ronson, partner at Corker Binning, in this week's issue of NLJ
Louise Uphill, senior associate at Moore Barlow LLP, dissects the faltering rollout of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 in this week's NLJ
Judgments are ‘worthless without enforcement’, says HHJ Karen Walden-Smith, senior circuit judge and chair of the Civil Justice Council’s enforcement working group. In this week's NLJ, she breaks down the CJC’s April 2025 report, which identified systemic flaws and proposed 39 reforms, from modernising procedures to protecting vulnerable debtors
Writing in NLJ this week, Katherine Harding and Charlotte Finley of Penningtons Manches Cooper examine Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26, the Supreme Court ruling that narrowed what counts as matrimonial property, and its potential impact upon claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
In this week's NLJ, Dr Jon Robins, editor of The Justice Gap and lecturer at Brighton University, reports on a campaign to posthumously exonerate Christine Keeler. 60 years after her perjury conviction, Keeler’s son Seymour Platt has petitioned the king to exercise the royal prerogative of mercy, arguing she was a victim of violence and moral hypocrisy, not deceit. Supported by Felicity Gerry KC, the dossier brands the conviction 'the ultimate in slut-shaming'
back-to-top-scroll