Practice—Family proceedings—Costs
R (on the application of Hillingdon London Borough Council and others) v The Lord Chancellor and another [2008] EWHC 2683 (Admin) [2008] All ER (D) 44 (Nov)
Queen’s Bench Division, Divisional Court, Dyson LJ, Bennett and Pitchford JJ
The increase in court fees for public law child care applications and placement order applications made by the Family Proceedings Fees Order 2008, (SI 2008/1054) and the Magistrates’ Courts Fees Order 2008 (SI 2008/1052) (the orders) is not unlawful.
Michael Supperstone QC and Joanne Clement (instructed by Rajesh Alagh) for the claimants. Sam Grodzinski (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the defendants. The first intervener did not appear and was not represented at the hearing. Lucy Theis QC, Hilton Harrop-Griffiths and Alistair MacDonald for the second intervener.
The proceedings concerned the lawfulness of the increase in court fees for public law child care applications and placement order applications (referred to compendiously as public law family proceedings) made by the orders. Section 31 of the Children Act 1989 provided local authorities with the conditions which would
