R v Jenefer Ebosele
[2024] EWHC 2357 (SCCO)
R v Lock
3 June 2024
[2024] EWHC 1324 (SCCO)
Senior Courts Costs Office
A lawyer appealed a decision about how much they should be paid for a criminal case. The case was interrupted for three months, with lots of new evidence added. The judge decided this was really two separate trials, not one long one, and the lawyer got more money.
Key Facts
- •Appeal by Shaw Graham Kersh solicitors against the determining officer's calculation of litigators' graduated fee.
- •Case involved Terence Lock, accused of conspiracy to supply Class A drugs.
- •Trial initially estimated at 2-3 weeks, ended after 4 days (July 13, 2023), then relisted for 10 October 2023 and concluded on 25 October 2023.
- •Solicitors claimed for a 4-day trial and a 12-day retrial; determining officer considered it a single continuous trial.
- •Determining officer referred to Crown Court Fee Guidance and R v Nettleton.
- •Three-month gap between trial segments, change in defendant's counsel, and substantial new evidence introduced in the second leg.
Legal Principles
Determining whether proceedings constitute a single continuous trial or a trial and retrial depends on several factors, including the length of time between segments, the stage at which the first leg concluded, the relative lengths of the segments, changes in advocates or judges, changes in the case, and any judge's comments.
Crown Court Fee Guidance and R v Nettleton
For a trial to be considered a new trial, the first trial must have run its course (jury failing to reach a verdict). However, a short first leg concluding for procedural reasons is still a trial.
R v Forsyth (2010) and Lord Chancellor v Ian Henery Solicitors Limited [2011] EWHC 3246 (QB)
The need for substantial further preparation work after a break in proceedings is a key indicator of a retrial rather than a continuation of the original trial.
R v Forsyth (2010) analysis by Costs Judge Rowley
Outcomes
Appeal successful.
The three-month gap, introduction of substantial new evidence, and change in defendant's counsel indicated a retrial, not a continuation of the original trial. The first leg, though short, constituted a trial.