R v Hussain
[2023] EWHC 3126 (SCCO)
R v Blake Aghedo Tromby
27 January 2023
[2023] EWHC 268 (SCCO)
Senior Courts Costs Office
A law firm appealed because the government reduced the amount they were paid for reviewing evidence in a criminal case. The government argued they only needed to pay for relevant evidence. The judge agreed with the government, saying the firm was paid enough.
Key Facts
- •Ashcott Solicitors appealed a Legal Aid Agency decision to reduce their Litigator's Graduated Fee Scheme (LGFS) claim for prosecution evidence (PPE) pages from 10,000 to 3,756.
- •The case involved a defendant charged with multiple serious offenses, including robbery and GBH.
- •Prosecution evidence included digital data from seized mobile phones and computers.
- •The appeal was determined on the papers without a hearing.
- •The dispute centered on whether various categories of electronic data (images, audio, technical metadata, etc.) should be included in the PPE page count.
Legal Principles
Determination of PPE page count in accordance with Schedule 2 of the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013.
Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, Schedule 2, paragraph 1
Guidance from Mr Justice Holroyde in Lord Chancellor v. SVS Solicitors [2017] EWHC 1045 (QB) on the discretion in determining PPE.
Lord Chancellor v. SVS Solicitors [2017] EWHC 1045 (QB), para. 50(i)-(xi)
The defence is obliged to consider all material served by the prosecution (though this principle's weight is considered in context of later case law).
R v. Furniss [2015] 1 Costs LR 151
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The Costs Judge found that the Determining Officer (DO) properly exercised her discretion in assessing the relevance of the electronic data. The exclusion of certain categories (images, audio, technical metadata) was deemed appropriate. The Judge preferred the Respondent's arguments and considered the later case law since R v Furniss to outweigh that decision.