Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email editor@familylaw.co.uk.
Spotlight
A day in the life Of...
Rebecca Delaney
Rebecca Delaney
Director & Partner
Read on
Re H (A Minor) v Northamptonshire County Council & Anor [2017] EWHC 282 (Fam)
Date:24 FEB 2017
Third slide
Law Reporter

(Family Division, Keehan J, 17 February 2017)

Costs – Human Rights Act claim – Public funding – Statutory charge – Whether a costs order could and should be made against the Lord Chancellor

An order for costs was made against the Lord Chancellor in Human Rights Act 1998 proceedings.

During the course of care proceedings in relation to the 8-year-old boy an application for declarations and damages was made under the Human Rights Act 1998 against the local authority.

The HRA claim was settled and the local authority agreed to pay £18,000 in damages.

An issue arose as to whether the Legal Aid Agency would contend that the statutory charge would attach to any damages awarded to the child in respect of the costs incurred under the public funding certificate issued in respect of the care proceedings. Ultimately the LAA decided the statutory charge would not apply to any HRA damages awarded to him. The process by which the LAA came to that decision gave rise to the local authority seeking an order for costs against the Lord Chancellor.

The judge held that the court did have the power to make a costs order against the Lord Chancellor and in the circumstances of this case it was fair, just and reasonable to do so. Costs payable were summarily assessed at £10,060.10.

Keehan J provided guidance to practitioners and the Legal Aid Agency on the approach to be taken in HRA claims made during the currency of care proceedings.


This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.

Case No: FD16F00087
Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWHC 282 (Fam)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL


Date: 17/02/2017
Before:

MR JUSTICE KEEHAN

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between:

H
(A minor, by his Litigation Friend, Lea Webber)
Claimant

and

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Defendant

and

THE LEGAL AID AGENCY
Respondents

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Aiden Vine QC and Douglas Allen (instructed by Matthew Montanaro of Brethertons Solicitors LLP) for the Claimant
William Tyler QC and Ben Mansfield (instructed by Northamptonshire County Council) for the Defendant
Holly Stout (instructed by The Government Legal Service) for the Respondents

Hearing dates: 17th & 18th January 2017

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Judgment

H (A Minor) v Northamptonshire County Council [2017] EWHC 282 (Fam).rtf
Family Court Practice, The
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2019 edition due out in May
£559.99
Financial Remedies Handbook
Financial Remedies Handbook
Formerly entitled the Ancillary Relief Handbook...
£91.99
Family Law Reports
Family Law Reports
"The unrivalled and authoritative source of...
£509.99