Report comment

If a litigant in person is able to recover more than say reasonable travel expenses for MF, there is a real danger that a system that is ripe for abuse will created. It is not too difficult to imagine MF's seeking substantial costs that cannot be substantiated. There is a good reason why litigation is a reserved activity; rather like surgery, gas fitting and electrical work. If someone wishes to employ a MF I accept that (unlike say surgery) it is not (usually) objectionable as a matter of wider public safety, so for that reason I would not seek a total ban, but allowing the fees charged to be recoverable is obviously wrong. It will overnight create a business opportunity for any number of charlatans who will no doubt pop up if they think there is a chance to profit. That is a very bad idea which should be resisted.
I was at a trial about 8 years ago when the claimant was represented by a MF who was a journalist. It was a complex loss of chance professional negligence case. The judge granted the claimant permission to use the MF but at the same time warned that it was not a good idea and that the Claimant should beware of what she was wishing for. The Claimant lost and sought permission to appeal (which was rightly refused) on the grounds that the judge had erred in allowing her to rely on a MF!