Intersar Al-Balhaa & Anor v RMG Residential Management Group Ltd
[2024] EWHC 229 (KB)
R v John Doak
27 January 2023
[2023] EWHC 271 (SCCO)
Senior Courts Costs Office
A solicitor appealed a lower-than-expected payment for representing a client in a complex and successful appeal. The court decided the reasons for reducing his pay were wrong and gave him the full amount he asked for, plus extra for the cost of appealing the decision.
Key Facts
- •Burrell Jenkins Solicitors appealed a decision of the Determining Officer at the Criminal Appeal Office regarding fees for representing Mr. John Doak in a successful Court of Appeal case.
- •The appeal concerned the hourly rate (£225 claimed, £150 allowed) and the appeal hearing fee (£1000 claimed, £575 allowed).
- •The Court of Appeal case involved successful appeals against conviction and sentence for a 2002 assault, revisited in 2021 after the victim's death.
- •The case involved complex expert evidence and was considered high-profile and complicated.
- •The 2013 Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations and the Taxing Officer’s Notes for Guidance (2002) were relevant.
- •The Determining Officer's decision relied on comparisons to other cases, Sir Christopher Bellamy's report, and the appellant's prior familiarity with the case.
Legal Principles
The appropriate officer must take into account all relevant circumstances, including the nature, importance, complexity, or difficulty of the work and the time involved, and allow a reasonable amount for all work actually and reasonably done.
Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, Schedule 3, paragraph 1(ii)
Where exceptional circumstances mean that the usual fee wouldn't provide reasonable remuneration, the appropriate officer may allow a reasonable amount.
Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, Schedule 3, paragraph 9(iv)
Factors to determine reasonable counsel fees include the case's importance, complexity, skill involved, time expended, and other relevant circumstances.
Taxing Officer’s Notes for Guidance (2002), paragraph 1.11
Outcomes
Appeal successful regarding hourly rate.
The Determining Officer's reliance on comparisons to other cases, Sir Christopher Bellamy's report, and prior familiarity was deemed inappropriate. The focus should be on a case-specific assessment of the relevant factors (TONG factors). The hourly rate of £225 was deemed reasonable.
Appeal successful regarding appeal hearing fee.
The Determining Officer's reasoning was unclear. The £1000 claimed was considered reasonable given the time involved (including preparation, travel and post-hearing attendance), and the intended purpose of the fee to encompass preparation and attendance.
Total claim of £7,324.25 (plus VAT) allowed.
Based on the successful appeal on both hourly rate and appeal hearing fee.
Appellant awarded £1,575 costs (plus VAT).
Awarded for the successful appeal.