R v Makinson

R v Makinson

The appeal succeeds because 300 hours for reading the excess PPE is reasonable, with cross-referencing largely excluded except where inseparable, and electronic filtering/search facilities were of limited value in this case.

Parties
Prosecution: R; Defendant: Makinson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (costs) / Appeal Under Regulation 29 of the Criminal Legal Aid (remuneration) Regulations 2013
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Special Preparation Fees, Graduated Fee Scheme, Pages of Prosecution Evidence (ppe), Cross Referencing in Costs Claims
Criminal Law Legal Aid Costs Special Preparation Fees Graduated Fee Scheme Pages of Prosecution Evidence (ppe) Cross Referencing in Costs Claims

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecution

Makinson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Determining Officer erred in limiting the special preparation hours for reading excess PPE
  2. 2 Whether cross-referencing forms part of reading excess PPE under Schedule 1 paragraph 17(3)
  3. 3 Appropriate allowance for use of electronic filtering and search facilities

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal succeeds because 300 hours for reading the excess PPE is reasonable, with cross-referencing largely excluded except where inseparable, and electronic filtering/search facilities were of limited value in this case.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Appellant to be paid for 300 hours of special preparation for reading excess PPE
  • Additional payment of £850 (exclusive of VAT) for costs to be made to the Applicant