Patel, R. v

Patel, R. v

The DCO was obtained on the basis of dishonest and materially false claims, including inflated hours and sham fee agreements, and deliberate non-disclosure of relevant invoices. The facts were unchallenged and, had they been known, the DCO would not have been made. Therefore, the DCO must be revoked and the interim payment of £500,000 repaid by Mr Patel and Neumans, jointly and severally, with costs awarded against Mr Patel.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant/defendant: Hitendra Patel; Interested Party/solicitors: Neumans Solicitors; Applicant/respondent: Lord Chancellor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (costs) / Application to Revoke Defence Costs Order (dco) and for Repayment of Interim Payment
Outcome
DCO revoked; repayment and costs ordered
Legal Topics
Defence Costs Order, Fraudulent Claims, Jurisdiction to Revoke Orders, Restitution of Funds
Criminal Law Costs Defence Costs Order Fraudulent Claims Jurisdiction to Revoke Orders Restitution of Funds

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Hitendra Patel

Appellant/defendant

Neumans Solicitors

Interested Party/solicitors

Lord Chancellor

Applicant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (costs) / Application to Revoke Defence Costs Order (dco) and for Repayment of Interim Payment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defence Costs Order (DCO) should be revoked due to fraudulent claims and lack of disclosure
  2. 2 Whether Mr Patel and/or Neumans should be ordered to repay £500,000 paid as an interim payment
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded against Mr Patel

Ratio Decidendi

The DCO was obtained on the basis of dishonest and materially false claims, including inflated hours and sham fee agreements, and deliberate non-disclosure of relevant invoices. The facts were unchallenged and, had they been known, the DCO would not have been made. Therefore, the DCO must be revoked and the interim payment of £500,000 repaid by Mr Patel and Neumans, jointly and severally, with costs awarded against Mr Patel.

Court Disposition

DCO revoked; repayment and costs ordered

Orders

  • The Defence Costs Order in favour of Mr Patel is revoked.
  • Mr Patel and Neumans are jointly and severally liable to repay £500,000 to the Lord Chancellor by 23rd January 2017.