Trial Fees: proposals that were put on hold in 2004 to be reintroduced following DCA review

The government this week made plain its intention to introduce controversial trial fees in civil cases - as it announced that all but two of the fee increases in the civil and family courts, which it consulted on last year, have now been implemented.


Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) minister Baroness Ashton said it will conduct a review this year, with the 'key objective' of 'the introduction of trial fees'. An hourly trial fee of £200 for a judge's time and use of the court facilities was proposed by the DCA in 2004, but the consultation was put on hold following vociferous opposition.


Graham Huntley, president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association and partner at City firm Lovells, said: 'Trial fees unduly penalise the litigant who, for whatever reason, resolves his dispute at trial.


'The DCA has already received very strong concerns about the proposals from almost all quarters of the legal profession, which is no doubt why trial fees were not adopted in the current round of fee increases. It is obviously a concern that the DCA is revisiting the idea of trial fees, at a time when the international litigation market is becoming so competitive, and London's status is clearly under threat.'


In the latest court fee increases, only two exceptions have been given. The DCA backed away from a proposed £170 hike in the £210 fee for ancillary relief applications, and also dropped proposed fee increases for issuing lower-value money claims. The DCA claims the new fees, which came into force at the end of last year, will raise £10.6 million.


Christina Blacklaws, chairwoman of the Law Society's family law committee, said: 'The ancillary relief exception is cold comfort, given what is happening with the rest of family work. Some might think proceedings involving children should be more of a priority, and it should apply to Children's Act applications as well.'


The DCA also announced plans for a 'fundamental review of the system of exemptions and remissions' to court fees during the year.


Kevin Martin, Law Society President, said: 'The majority of cases are settled before trial and those that proceed to trial contribute to the development of the common law in England and Wales. The introduction of hourly fees must not act as an obstacle to proceeding to trial. Any fees must be set at a reasonable level and hourly fees should not apply to fast-track cases where certainty of costs is so important.'