Key Facts
- •Asghar & Co solicitors appealed the classification of an offence for calculating litigator's graduated fee under the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013.
- •Their client, Alan Hajer, faced a single count indictment for possessing articles for use in fraud (section 6(1) of the Fraud Act 2006).
- •Hajer was found to possess counterfeit passport data pages and other identity documents.
- •The prosecution initially intended to bring further charges, but ultimately offered no evidence.
- •The solicitors argued the value of the fraud exceeded £100,000 based on potential people trafficking, but the prosecution didn't confirm this.
- •The determining officer and the Costs Judge needed to determine the value of the fraud to classify the offence and calculate the fee.
Legal Principles
The calculation of the graduated fee depends on classifying the offence based on the value involved, exceeding thresholds of £30,000 and £100,000.
Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, Part 7 of Schedule 1
If the fee depends on exceeding a value limit, the value is presumed not to exceed that limit unless the litigator proves otherwise.
Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, Schedule 2, paragraph 3(1)(c)
The burden of proof is on the litigator to prove the value of the criminal activity.
R v Garness (132/13), applying principles consistent with 2013 Regulations.
Outcomes
The appeal was dismissed.
The Costs Judge found insufficient evidence to support the solicitors' claim that the value of the fraud exceeded £100,000. The lack of further charges, the ambiguous evidence concerning the extent of any people trafficking, and the absence of specific figures to determine value weighed against the appeal.