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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll