R v Taj
[2024] EWHC 2070 (SCCO)
Interpretation of 'consideration of unused material' in the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013 (as amended in 2020).
Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, as amended by the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) (Amendment) Regulations 2020.
Reasonableness of hours claimed for considering unused material.
Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013 (as amended).
Appeal allowed.
The judge preferred the Appellant's interpretation of his work log, finding that 43.25 hours (including the initial 3-hour fixed fee) was a modest amount of time to consider over 7000 pages of material. The judge also noted that a broad interpretation of 'consideration' in the 2020 regulations was desirable, but ultimately based the decision on the appellant's first proposition.
Appellant awarded 40.25 hours for considering unused material.
The judge accepted the appellant's claim that the time spent was reasonably used for considering the material.
Appellant awarded costs of £300 (plus VAT) and the £100 already paid on appeal.
The Appellant was successful in the appeal.