header-logo header-logo

07 July 2011 / Charlotte Bradley
Issue: 7473 / Categories: Features , Costs
printer mail-detail

Testing times

Charlotte Bradley reviews the “new” test for enforcing LSC cost orders

The first reported court decision since the change of test to be applied when enforcing a costs order against the Legal Services Commission (LSC) has now been made, a decade since the change in regulations, and, ironically, at a time when the government is pushing ahead its plans to slash legal aid.

In her judgment in LSC v F, A & V [2011] EWHC 899 (QB), [2011] All ER (D) 95 (Apr) Sharpe J refused the LSC’s appeal against the costs judge’s decision to allow the respondents to enforce their costs orders totalling £495,000. This claim against the LSC arose from unusual High Court family proceedings. 

The factual background

The respondents, F, A and V, were interveners in financial proceedings on divorce. F and V were sisters to the husband and A was the husband’s mother. All were Iranian. The wife (who had lived in the UK with the husband) asserted in the

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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll