header-logo header-logo

03 August 2012 / Jonathan Herring
Issue: 7525 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Different strokes?

Can costs be ordered against a local authority, asks Jonathan Herring

The Supreme Court is not normally asked to consider costs orders in any detail, but in Re T (Children) [2012] UKSC 36 it did so because the question was an important one of principle. The central issue was whether a local authority could be required to pay the costs of a party to care proceedings.
Care proceedings had been brought by a council, following allegations from two children that they had been sexually abused by their father and six other men. It was alleged that the children’s grandparents had colluded with the abuse. The grandparents were joined as interveners as well as five of the men. A fact-finding hearing took place in 2009, lasting five and a half weeks. The hearing exonerated the grandparents and the five men.

The costs issue arose because the grandparents (a retired fisherman and part-time bookkeeper), who had a modest income of £25,000, were not entitled to legal aid. They borrowed £55,000 to fund their legal advice and representation. It

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll