Emeh, R. v [2023] EWHC 1694 (SCCO) (22 June 2023)

Emeh, R. v [2023] EWHC 1694 (SCCO) (22 June 2023)

Material of central importance to the prosecution's case, from which evidence relied upon was extracted and which required defence scrutiny, must be included in the PPE count even if not formally served, following the principles in Hayes and SVS Solicitors. The Determining Officer erred by treating the prosecution's classification as 'unused' as decisive and by failing to include material expressly required by the regulations.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 1694 (SCCO)
Parties
Respondent: R; Appellant: EMEH
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Costs Appeal (criminal Legal Aid) / Appeal Under Regulation 29 of the Criminal Legal Aid (remuneration) Regulations 2013
Outcome
Appeal allowed in full.
Legal Topics
Litigators' Graduated Fee Scheme, Pages of Prosecution Evidence (ppe), Electronic Evidence, Legal Aid Remuneration, Unused Material, Formal and Informal Service of Evidence
Criminal Law Legal Costs Litigators' Graduated Fee Scheme Pages of Prosecution Evidence (ppe) Electronic Evidence Legal Aid Remuneration Unused Material Formal and Informal Service of Evidence

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Respondent

EMEH

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Costs Appeal (criminal Legal Aid) / Appeal Under Regulation 29 of the Criminal Legal Aid (remuneration) Regulations 2013

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 1,450 pages of evidence treated as 'unused' by the prosecution should be included in the PPE count for the purposes of calculating the appellant's graduated fee under the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013.
  2. 2 Whether formal service is a prerequisite for inclusion of evidence in the PPE count.

Ratio Decidendi

Material of central importance to the prosecution's case, from which evidence relied upon was extracted and which required defence scrutiny, must be included in the PPE count even if not formally served, following the principles in Hayes and SVS Solicitors. The Determining Officer erred by treating the prosecution's classification as 'unused' as decisive and by failing to include material expressly required by the regulations.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in full.

Orders

  • PPE count to be increased by 1,450 pages for calculation of the appellant's graduated fee.
  • Additional payment to the appellant, including £500 (exclusive of VAT) for costs and £100 paid on appeal.