header-logo header-logo

28 May 2014
Issue: 7608 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Legal Aid Agency may have to bear cost of expert fees

The Legal Aid Agency—formally known as the Legal Service Commission (LSC) —was wrong to refuse to pay the full cost of an expert witness report ordered for a child by the family court. 

The Court of Appeal held the LSC should not have refused to pay more than one-third of the expert’s fees, in JG v The Lord Chancellor [2014] All ER (D) 192 (May), [2014] EWCA Civ 656. 

The Lord Chancellor, for the LSC, argued that parents who are not legally aided should pay their share of the expert’s fee. The Law Society, intervening, countered that the expert was instructed by the child alone. 

According to the Law Society, the decision means the Legal Aid Agency will in future need to look at the facts of a specific case to decide whether it should pay the fees in full, and that where unrepresented parents cannot afford to commission expert evidence it may be appropriate for the full costs to be borne by the child through their legal aid certificate.

Geraldine Morris, head of LexisPSL Family, says: “Family justice resources are under huge pressure at the moment. 

“The bringing into effect of the Child Arrangements Programme on 22 April was with the primary aim of reducing damaging delay in private children proceedings. The decision by the LSC in this case caused a lengthy period of delay, and the Court of Appeal’s decision will therefore be welcomed by practitioners and parties alike in the hope that the court’s guidance will assist in similar future cases.”

Issue: 7608 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Firm awards training contracts to paralegals through internal programme

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Private client disputes specialist joins commercial litigation team

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Cumbria firm appoints new head of residential property

NEWS
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 
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
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’
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’ 
Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients
back-to-top-scroll