The links section is an integral part of this blog. For today, however, I wanted to take those links on the issue of court fees and put them in a post of their own. That is the responses today to the discussion on court fees in the Justice Committee of the House of Common. One feature of this is how far the reports go beyond the mainstream legal press. I hope to set out full details of the discussion when it is published online.
The evidence of Lord Dyson before the Committee can be seen here.
“3.35 In chapter 7 of the Preliminary Report I expressed the view that court fees were too high and that the principle of full cost pricing was wrong in principle
3.39 I recognise that, at least in the present economic climate, it is unrealistic to propose a reduction in court fees, even though such a reduction would be welcome and would be very much in the public interest. Instead I shall limit myself to the recommendation that there be no further increases in civil court fees, save increases which are in line with the Retail Price Index rate of inflation. All receipts from civil court fees should be ploughed back into the civil justice system, not used to subsidise other parts of the legal system.”
- John Hyde in the Law Society GazetteSenior judges lambast government over court fees.
- Nick Hilborne in Legal Futures Dyson condemns “desperate” MoJ over enhanced court fees
- The Guardian Top UK judges denounce “dangerous” increase in court fees
- The Independent Soaring court fees “will discourage ordinary people from seeking justice”
- Legal Cheek Court fees row reveals huge rift between government and judiciary.
- The Express and Star Top judge warns rise in court fees “risks access to justice”.
- What the Jackson Report said about court fees: Too high and should be used to improve civil justice system.