LEGAL_AID_

The claimant company commenced proceedings against the defendants, alleging fraud, in November 1996 and obtained a world wide freezing order.

In February 1997 an emergency...The claimant company commenced proceedings against the defendants, alleging fraud, in November 1996 and obtained a world wide freezing order.

In February 1997 an emergency legal aid certificate was granted to the first defendant but was subsequently revoked.

In the meantime Harman J had handed down judgment relating to two applications he had heard in the proceedings and had made a consequential costs order.

Following the revocation of the certificate the claimant applied for variation of the order for costs.

Harman J was no longer available.

Rimer J held that the court did not have jurisdiction to vary the order.

The claimant appealed.Andrew R Thompson (who did not appear before Harman J) (instructed by CMS Cameron McKenna) for the claimants.

Hugo Page (who did not appear below) (instructed by Landau & Scanlan) for the first defendant.Held, allowing the appeal, that the legislative purpose of the statutory fiction provided by reg.74(2) of the Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989, that a person whose legal aid certificate had been revoked was deemed never to have been assisted, amounted to a change in circumstances in [an] assisted persons circumstances within the meaning of reg.130; that, on revocation, the former assisted party lost the protection provided by section 17 of the Legal Aid Act 1988 that his liability to pay costs should not exceed that which it was reasonable for him to pay; and that, accordingly, the court had jurisdiction under reg.130 to vary the order.