Hale urges lawyers to remember pro bono costs orders


Lady Hale

Hale: Pro bono costs orders very easy to do

The president of the Supreme Court has urged lawyers acting pro bono to remember to apply for pro bono costs orders in any case where costs would normally be awarded.

Speaking at an event to mark the 10th anniversary of the Access to Justice Foundation (ATJF) – which receives the proceeds of all pro bono costs orders – Baroness Hale said: “Our mission is to ensure every court in which pro bono costs may appear, knows about it… It’s very easy to do, once you know how.”

Under section 194 of the Legal Services Act 2007, pro bono costs can be claimed in cases from the county court through to the Supreme Court. CPR 46.7 makes provision for the normal costs provisions to apply in pro bono cases.

At the event, ATJF trustee Bob Nightingale asked Lord Chancellor David Gauke, also in attendance, to consider expanding this provision to all tribunals. “Where costs can apply, so should pro bono costs,” he said.

The ATJF has awarded over £7m in grants over the 10 years, supporting hundreds of service providers and getting legal help to the most vulnerable.

Mr Nightingale also called on law firms to donate funds from unclaimed client accounts, to the ATJF campaign ‘It’s Not Just Peanuts’.

For more details on pro bono costs orders, go to the ATJF’s website. The foundation can also provide templates including draft costs schedules, part 36 offers and draft orders.




Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog

18 October 2018
Claire Stockford

An analogue decision? Google defeats attempt at consumer ‘class action’

In an eagerly awaited judgment, the High Court handed down its ruling in Richard Lloyd v Google LLC on 8 October. It seems clear that there is a degree of reluctance to permit group litigation which will not materially benefit consumers. That being said, it is hard to ignore the increased possibilities of group litigation in the context of corporate data breaches, particularly following the implementation of GDPR earlier this year.

Read More