Report comment

In reply to Anonymous 9th Feb @ 17.43 :

Thanks for all the prior upvotes. Presumably we're good friends but your mysterious anonymity precludes me from establishing which one.

I perhaps wasn't clear in my explanation. I agree with you. I'm not suggesting that a "winning Defendant" should pay the issue fee. I am referring to situations where the Claimant has won and his Bill includes Court fees which have been paid. Defendant says : "The Claimant is on benefits (because we injured him so badly as to render him incapable of working) and is entitled to fee remissions therefore, we don't have to pay them". I've seen it argued many times and I've seen DJ's accept the contention.

My point was that whenever this (in my opinion) unconscionable argument is allowed to succeed, the taxpayer picks up the tab when in fact the losing Defendant should pay all of the Court fees incurred by the Claimant regardless of the Claimants financial means.

I hope this sufficiently explains my position and results in a forthwith reversal of the (unwarranted) downvote.