Government court fees hike would undermine the civil and family justice system, says top judge

Top judges in the UK have derided government plans to increase the cost of going to court in England and Wales. They say the costs increase would undermine the civil and family justice system.

In an official response to the consultation on the plans, senior judiciary said the raised costs would provide no tangible benefits to litigants or the judicial system as a whole.

In its defence, the UK government argued that "hardworking taxpayers” should not have to subsidise the legal battles of millionaires.

What are the changes put forward by the Government?

In an effort to reduce the civil and family courts' £150 million annual deficit the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) proposes to increase the cost of court fees. It also plans to introduce 'enhanced court fees' which would be over and above the cost of the proceedings. The Government has proposed a 125% increase in the fee for permission to apply applications. A 216% increase for permission to proceed in the availability of legal aid for judicial review has also been put forward.

The proposal is also designed to fund any of the remaining deficit after the recovery costs of the 'enhanced court fees' have taken effect. In its critique of the planned court cost rise, the judges referred to the MoJ's intentions as a "novel concept” which "represents a departure from the Government's policy of not charging more than a service costs.”

Generating more money for the HMCTS

In an effort to generate more money for Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS), the changes would involve raising the costs of getting divorced, as well as other civil claims. The MoJ said its proposals would not affect the number of people who use the judicial system. The judiciary responded by saying this "appears to contradict a basic law of economics.”

Litigators have warned the government's plans to increase court fees for commercial cases could lead to claimants facing a fee demand greater than their legal costs. Under the MoJ's "percentage-fee based system”, the court fees for litigants in commercial money claims could rise from under £3,000 to over £21,000. In order to offset the actual cost of court time, daily rates of £1,000 for hearings, trial of a preliminary issue, or substantive trial of the claim, would also be introduced.

"Is it right that parties in civil proceedings, many of whom will not have money to spare, should subsidise proceedings between divorcing couples, still less proceedings for the protection of children?” the judiciary asked.

Keeping England and Wales' court systems the "best in the world”

Courts Minister, Shailesh Vara said the courts of England and Wales were the "best in the world”. Vara added that the by properly funding the system would be "kept that way”.

"Hardworking taxpayers should not have to subsidise millionaires embroiled in long cases fighting over vast amounts of money, and we are redressing that balance,” Vara added.

Vulnerable families

The courts minister also added that the plans would protect vulnerable groups. For sensitive family issues such as adoption applications and child contact, fees would be kept the same, Shailesh Vara assured. On top of keeping fees the same for "sensitive family issues”, the MoJ plans to scrap the application fee for victims of domestic violence, "seeking injunctions to protect themselves.”

Senior judges have warned the proposed increases to court fees for judicial review cases will only make a small contribution to the Government's ultimate aim to reduce costs. In its submission to the Ministry of Justice's consultant Court Fees: Proposals for Reform, the senior judges warned the increased costs would have a "chilling effect” on such applications.

If you have any concerns or issues relating to family law, one of Tracey Miller's divorce experts can provide advice in many aspects of family law, including divorce and separations.

Meanwhile, what are your thoughts about the planned court costs rises? Will it fail to provide a tangible benefit to the judicial system in England or Wales? Or is the Government right to put up costs as why should "hardworking taxpayers” have to subsidise the legal quarries of millionaires?