header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 December 2016 / Peter Thompson KC
Issue: 7727 / Categories: Opinion , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

The right to be heard

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7727_thompson

Peter Thompson QC contends that setting aside a default judgment should be a free service

The right to be heard. It is older than the Human Rights Act and older than the Convention. It goes back to the days when lawyers spoke Latin: audi alteram partem. It is one of the twin pillars of natural justice that are now incorporated in Art 6 of the Convention and in our black letter law: “In the determination of his civil rights…everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.”

So what about court fees? Should the right to a fair and public hearing mean that access to the courts and tribunals should be free at the point of use, like other public services? This is the case in the social security and child support tribunals; and the recent introduction of hefty fees for access to the employment tribunals as well as a major hike in court fees has been

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
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 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
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
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
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’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
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’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll