Safe Speed Forums

I ask if you could please help me identify the relevant regulations and guidelines with respect to claiming costs following the Justices making an order for payment of costs from central funds after the discontinuance of my case.

With respect to a speeding allegation I required the technical services of a professional engineer to investigate various issues with respect to the operation and use of laser speed cameras and analysis of the resulting video to help with the preparation of my defence.

I am a professionally qualified engineer with the necessary expertise, experience and qualifications.

I have submitted an invoice of costs for the necessary professional technical services that were required, yet these costs have been refused and the clerk will not provide me with an explanation for refusing these costs, nor will he inform me of the regulations on which the decision is based or explain the procedure for appealing against his decision.

I have noted that in the case of R. v Stafford Stone and Eccleshall Magistrates Court Ex p. Robinson, a solicitor represented himself in criminal proceedings and succeeded in obtaining an order for costs in his favour, he was entitled on taxation to recover the fees chargeable had he been representing a defendant rather than himself.

I similarly claim that I should be entitled to the costs for the professional technical engineering services I provided in the same way as the solicitor was able to claim the professional services he provided for his case.

I ask if you would please advise me on the section of the relevant regulations which would apply to such circumstances and how I can appeal against the refusal of these costs.

Dear Dr L

Thank you for your e-mail of June concerning the costs allowed to expert witnesses in criminal cases. The regulations governing the payment of an acquitted defendant’s costs from Central Funds are set out in the Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986. These state as follows:

“7(1) The appropriate authority shall consider the claim, any further particulars, information or documents submitted by the applicant and shall allow such costs in respect of

(a) such work as appears to it to have been actually and reasonably done; and
(b) such disbursements as appear to it to have been actually and reasonably incurred,

as it considers reasonably sufficient to compensate the applicant for any expenses properly incurred by him in the proceedings.

7(2) In determining costs under paragraph (1) the appropriate authority shall take into account all the relevant circumstances of the case including the nature, importance, complexity or difficulty of the work or time involved.

7(3) When determining costs for the purpose of this regulation, there shall be allowed a reasonable amount in respect of all costs reasonably incurred and any doubts which the appropriate authority may have as to whether the costs were reasonably incurred or were reasonable in amount shall be resolved against the applicant”.

I understand that you are entitled to be told, in writing, how the appropriate authority came to their decision to enable you to consider whether or not to take judicial review proceedings. I can only suggest that you take steps to obtain this information.

Yours sincerely

HMCS Customer Service Unit