header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 June 2013 / David Burrows
Categories: Features , Family , Costs , Jackson , LASPO 2012
printer mail-detail

A heavy cost?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

David Burrows reviews how LASPO has changed the funding landscape of family litigation

Costs D-Day – 1 April 2013 – brought limited changes for the family lawyer as a direct result of the Jackson reforms to the CPR 1998 costs rules introduced by the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2013 (CP(A)R 2013). However, for the family lawyer with a legal aid practice, the funding landscape changes completely under Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO).

Costs can mean two different things:
• what a client pays to a lawyer to run his or her case (funding); or
• the sum of money which is ordered to be paid by one party to another (costs) for their expense on the proceedings (mostly for lawyers).

This article considers costs in both senses in the context of family proceedings. It will be recalled that the costs rules for civil proceedings are applied in a variety of different ways (according to type of proceedings) to family proceedings.

For the funding of family proceedings, two regimes were

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll