Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
No fault divorce - the end of the blame game
The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020, which passed into law on 25 June 2020, will introduce "no fault" divorce in England and Wales for the first time. This article looks at what it...
New Cafcass guidance on working with children during COVID-19
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) has published guidance on working with children during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The guidance sets out arrangements for...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
Online event: An update on recovery in the civil, family courts & tribunals
HM Courts and Tribunals Service has announced that it is holding an online event to discuss its recovery plan for the civil, family courts and tribunals, which was published on 9 November 2020...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
View all articles
Authors

COSTS:Re T (Costs: Care Proceedings: Serious Allegations Not Proved) [2012] UKSC 36

Sep 29, 2018, 18:20 PM
Slug : 2012ukcs36
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jul 30, 2012, 11:05 AM
Article ID : 99621

(Supreme Court, Lady Hale, Lord Phillips, Lord Mance, Lord Dyson, Lord Carnwath, 26 July 2012) 

A fact-finding hearing exonerated the father, grandparents and several other men of sexual abuse. The grandparents did not qualify for legal aid, incurred costs of £52,000 and so sought to recover their costs from the local authority.

The judge dismissed the application on the basis that the usual rule was no order for costs unless reprehensible conduct could be proved. In the Court of Appeal the appeal was allowed and it was held that the decision in Re J (Costs of Fact-Finding Hearing) [2009] EWCA Civ 1350, [2010] 1 FLR 1893 was favourable to the grandparents.

Permission to appeal to the Supreme Court was granted and Cafcass and the Grandparents' Association intervened. The appeal was allowed on the basis that it would not interfere with the grandparents' entitlement to claim their costs. Justice did not demand that any deficiency in the provision of legal aid funding should be made up out of local authority funds. It was legitimate to have regard to the competing demands on the limited funds of local authorities. The general practice of not awarding costs in the absence of reprehensible conduct or an unreasonable stance accorded with the ends of justice.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from