header-logo header-logo

13 November 2008
Issue: 7345 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Family , Costs
printer mail-detail

Law Reports

Practice—Family proceedings—Costs

R (on the application of Hillingdon London Borough Council and others) v The Lord Chancellor and another [2008] EWHC 2683 (Admin) [2008] All ER (D) 44 (Nov)

Queen’s Bench Division, Divisional Court, Dyson LJ, Bennett and Pitchford JJ

The increase in court fees for public law child care applications and placement order applications made by the Family Proceedings Fees Order 2008, (SI 2008/1054) and the Magistrates’ Courts Fees Order 2008 (SI 2008/1052) (the orders) is not unlawful.

Michael Supperstone QC and Joanne Clement (instructed by Rajesh Alagh) for the claimants. Sam Grodzinski (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the defendants. The first intervener did not appear and was not represented at the hearing. Lucy Theis QC, Hilton Harrop-Griffiths and Alistair MacDonald for the second intervener.

The proceedings concerned the lawfulness of the increase in court fees for public law child care applications and placement order applications (referred to compendiously as public law family proceedings) made by the orders. Section 31 of the Children

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
Can a meticulously maintained spreadsheet turn a couple’s informal financial arrangements into legally enforceable obligations? 
back-to-top-scroll