Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 288 (Oct)
Neutral Citation: [2002] EWCA Civ 1453
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Aldous, Tuckey and Longmore LJJ

Representation James Mellor (instructed by DLA, Liverpool) for the claimant.
  Graham Shipley (instructed by Gorna & Co, Manchester) for the defendant.
  Jeremy Morgan (instructed by the Policy and Legal Department, Legal Services Commission) for the Legal Services Commission.
Judgment Dates: 21 October 2002

Catchwords

Legal Aid - Civil proceedings - Costs - Ability of court to award indemnity costs in favour of assisted person - Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989, reg 107B.

The Case

The effect of reg107B of the Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 was to disapply the indemnity principle in cases involving legal aid. It was impossible to say that the rationale of an award of indemnity costs was that the successful party should not be out of pocket; rather the rationale would be that the unsuccessful party had misconducted himself (as in the instant case), or he had failed to beat an offer to settle, or had conducted a test case for the benefit of other litigants. From that it could be seen that it was not a principled objection to an award of an indemnity costs for the losing party to say that a legally aided litigant would not himself recover the difference between a standard and an indemnity costs order.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.