R. v SVS Solicitors
The appellant solicitors' failure to serve a compliant cross-application or disclose grounds for opposing the hearsay notice, and their continued representation of the client in breach of CPR 34.3(2), constituted improper, unreasonable, and negligent conduct. This breach caused the wasted costs of bringing the witness from Australia. The wasted costs order was justified and not a mere error of judgment.
- Parties
- Appellant: SVS Solicitors; Respondent: Crown
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 15 February 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Wasted Costs Order
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Wasted Costs Orders, Professional Conduct, Criminal Procedure, Hearsay Evidence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
SVS Solicitors
Appellant
Crown
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Wasted Costs Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant solicitors acted improperly, unreasonably, or negligently in opposing a hearsay notice without disclosing grounds and requiring a witness to attend from Australia, thereby incurring wasted costs
- 2 Whether the wasted costs order was justified under section 19A of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 and relevant Practice Directions
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant solicitors' failure to serve a compliant cross-application or disclose grounds for opposing the hearsay notice, and their continued representation of the client in breach of CPR 34.3(2), constituted improper, unreasonable, and negligent conduct. This breach caused the wasted costs of bringing the witness from Australia. The wasted costs order was justified and not a mere error of judgment.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Wasted costs order against SVS Solicitors in the sum of £3,042.50 upheld
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment