header-logo header-logo

14 February 2008 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7308 / Categories: Opinion , Public , Legal services , Community care
printer mail-detail

NLJ Column

Hikes in court fees will only serve to undermine access to justice, says Jon Robins

It’s easy to characterise the access to justice debate as being all about the problems bedevilling legal aid. But that, of course, isn’t the whole story—far from it. HM Courts Service (HMCS) is currently consulting on the rather dry subject of court fees. Informing the Public Law Family Fees Consultation Paper is a superficially attractive argument that the courts should pay their own way. This isn’t an unreasonable proposition, surely? If the Halifax Building Society wants to repossess your house, why shouldn’t they pay up front for the privilege? Childcare proceedings cost the courts a whopping £35m and the government is proposing that social services departments meet the “full cost” through court fees of £4,000 (currently, only £150) and £4,825 if a case goes to a full hearing.

 
ILLOGICAL FEES
A couple of weeks ago, District Judge Nick Crichton opened a pioneering specialist family drug and alcohol court in London. It’s a ground breaking project based on US schemes which, it is claimed, have helped
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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll