Regina v Bowden

Regina v Bowden

The appeal was dismissed because the proceedings did not amount to a meaningful trial commencement; the only issue before the court was the prosecution's application to adjourn, which does not constitute substantial case management. The prosecution's decision to offer no evidence was due to witness issues, not defence submissions. Therefore, the determining officer was correct to apply the cracked trial fee.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Defendant: Shaun Bowden
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Costs Appeal / Appeal From Determining Officer's Costs Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Litigators Graduated Fee Scheme, Criminal Legal Aid (remuneration) Regulations 2013, Cracked Trial Definition, Costs Assessment

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Shaun Bowden

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Costs Appeal / Appeal From Determining Officer's Costs Decision

  1. 1 Whether the case should be remunerated as a trial or a cracked trial under the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings amounted to a 'meaningful' trial commencement

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the proceedings did not amount to a meaningful trial commencement; the only issue before the court was the prosecution's application to adjourn, which does not constitute substantial case management. The prosecution's decision to offer no evidence was due to witness issues, not defence submissions. Therefore, the determining officer was correct to apply the cracked trial fee.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The determining officer's decision to calculate the solicitors' fee by reference to a cracked trial fee is upheld.
  • If the issue of travel expenses remains in dispute, parties may make further submissions by email.