Catherine Deborah Alexander v Legal Ombudsman
[2024] EWHC 886 (Admin)
Tom Johnson v Bank of Scotland PLC
30 January 2023
[2023] EWHC 169 (Ch)
High Court
A man sued a bank, lost, and wanted the court to pay for a full recording of his appeal hearing. The judge said no, only paying for the judge's decision, because the man hadn't given good reasons. A separate cost issue was put on hold.
Key Facts
- •Dispute between mortgage lender (Bank of Scotland) and borrower (Tom Johnson, litigant in person) regarding an interest-only loan from 2010.
- •Claim initially for £426,000, then amended to £726,400, alleging tort and breach of fiduciary duty.
- •District Judge Wales struck out the claim due to insufficient particulars.
- •Johnson applied to set aside the striking-out order; District Judge Woodburn dismissed the application.
- •Johnson appealed, requiring a transcript for the appeal; he requested a publicly funded transcript of the entire hearing, not just the judgment.
Legal Principles
A party may require a transcript upon payment; the court may direct a transcript at public expense if the party qualifies for fee remission or is in poor financial circumstances, and it's necessary in the interests of justice.
CPR rule 39.9(3) and CPR rule 52.14
An application for a transcript at public expense should be made within the appellant's notice.
CPR Practice Direction 52B, paragraph 4.3
A second application for the same relief requires showing a material change in circumstances.
Chanel Ltd v FW Woolworth & Co Ltd [1981] 1 WLR 485, CA
Outcomes
The application for a publicly funded transcript of the entire hearing was dismissed.
While the claimant qualified for fee remission, the court found it wasn't necessary in the interests of justice. The claimant's reasons were deemed insufficient; his participation in the hearing, vague allegations of unfairness, and the procedural, non-merits-based nature of the lower court decisions were highlighted.
The application for a publicly funded transcript of the judgment was granted.
This was deemed necessary in the interests of justice given the claimant's financial circumstances and the lower cost.
The application for a costs capping order was adjourned pending the appeal outcome.
To be heard before a full-time district judge if the appeal is successful.