Key Facts
- •Amber Walker appealed a determining officer's decision to calculate her graduated fee using band 17.1 under the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013.
- •The appeal concerned the representation of Ann Frizell, charged with unlawful waste dumping.
- •Frizell was a director of a company also charged, and section 157(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 applied.
- •The determining officer believed section 157(1) didn't widen the scope of the offence to allow re-banding.
- •Walker argued that section 157(1) should be reclassified from band 17.1 to 6.1, as it formed the core of the defence and constituted a fraud case.
- •The case was compared to R v Bowden, involving a larger fraud scheme.
Legal Principles
Graduated fees for counsel are calculated based on the offences faced by the defendant, as per the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013.
Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013
An advocate can apply for re-banding of an offence under Schedule 1, paragraph 3 of the 2013 Regulations. The determining officer must either confirm the banding or re-band the offence.
Schedule 1, paragraph 3 of the 2013 Regulations
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
While section 157(1) could be reclassified, the court found insufficient evidence to justify re-classification to band 6.1 based on the facts; the Frizell case was differentiated from the R v Bowden case, a larger fraud scheme. The court held that there is no equity in the regulations permitting discretionary overrides. The fee must be based on the offences faced by the defendant.