Also see Part I para 9:
‘we propose reducing the 10,000 threshold for PPE and moving claims for pages in excess of 6,000 into the special preparation provisions. It is in cases with 6,000 or more pages that we have seen a significant increase in PPE caused in
in part by electronic evidence now coming within the definition of PPE, most commonly mobile phone or computer downloads in serious drugs and fraud cases. Applying the special preparation provisions will mean that where there are more than 6,000 pages we will
allow payment for work reasonably and actually undertaken.’
From: members@mail.lccsa.org.uk [mailto:members@mail.lccsa.org.uk]
On Behalf Of Jonathan Black
Sent: 10 February 2017 13:32
To: members@mail.lccsa.org.uk
Subject: MOJ consultation on LGFS and Court appointees
5. We consider that, despite the fact that this can be a sensitive task, the work of court appointees under section 38 or section 4A is in reality no different to that
undertaken by lawyers acting for a defendant under legal aid. Therefore we propose capping such costs at legal aid rates, as we have already done in relation to Defendants’ Costs Orders. There is no reason to pay a premium for this work just because payment
is made from central funds rather than the legal aid budget. The work involved and time required to prepare is little different from many legal aid cases.
Sent from my iPhone
To unsubscribe from the LCCSA Members eGroup click
here.
To take a break from receiving emails from the LCCSA Members eGroup click
here.
To resume receiving emails from the LCCSA Members eGroup click
here.