Increase to Court Fees

The Government issued a public consultation on 22 March 2021. The Ministry of Justice is consulting on increasing some court fees in line with historical inflation dating from August 2016 to April 2021, or from the year the fee was last amended (capped at August 2016). The proposal is limited to fees which are under-recovering compared to the estimated cost of the service and to fees which are enhanced, meaning they can legally be set above the cost of service. The impacted fees are included in the following fee orders:

•            Family Proceedings Fees Order 2008 No 1054 (43 impacted fees);

•            Civil Proceedings Fees Order 2008 No 1053 (67 impacted fees);

•            Court of Protection Fees Order 2007 No 1745 (3 impacted fees); and

•            Magistrates Courts Fees Order 2008 No 1052 (20 impacted fees).

At the same time as increasing fees, the Government is also proposing to widen access to the Help with Fees scheme and make it more generous. This proposal includes inflationary uplifts to the income thresholds, including the couple and child premiums, in the Help with Fees scheme, backdated to August 2016. The proposal will widen access to and increase the generosity of the Help with Fees scheme. In particular, the extended scheme will benefit women, people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds, disabled people and younger people, who all feature disproportionately among low income groups.

The proposed fee increases will raise an estimated additional net income of £11-£17 million a year for HMCTS after fee remissions, including the proposed changes to Help with Fees, are applied. This will help to ensure HMCTS continues to have the necessary funding to complete its much needed and important activities. Given the current economic uncertainty and the difficulty in forecasting rates of inflation accurately at this time, the figures included in this proposal are indicative and will be revised, based on actuals, prior to the implementation of the revised fee. Therefore, this estimated income is subject to change.

Responses are welcomed from anyone with an interest in or views on the subject covered by this consultation. The full consultation is available at: https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/increasing-selected-court-fees-income-thresholds. Responses are required by the 17th May and can be submitted via an online survey using the link above, via email: mojfeespolicy@justice.gov.uk, or by post to: Fees Policy Team, Ministry of Justice, 102 Petty France, London SW1H 9AJ.

Any questions regarding this consultation can be addressed to the Ministry of Justice Fees Policy Team (mojfeespolicy@justice.gov.uk).

The Deputyship Standards

The Deputyship standards have been developed with both professional and public bodies and form an important view of the new approach to support and supervise professional and public authority Deputies. The Deputyship standards clearly set out what is expected of a professional Deputy and provide an important checklist of actions every Deputy should follow. The Deputyship Standards are set by the Office of the Public Guardian.


The standards fall into the following categories; secure P’s finances and assets, gain insight into P in order to make best interests decisions on his behalf, maintain effective processes and organization, have the necessary skills and knowledge to carry out the work expected of a professional Deputy and finally, health and welfare standards.


In terms of securing P’s finances and assets, clear guidance is set out outlining the Deputy’s duty from receipt of the Deputyship Order with respect P’s assets and liabilities. The Deputy is required to carry out a benefits review and ensure that benefits and savings reviews are carried out on behalf of P annually. Guidance is also provided regarding P’s property whereby they no longer reside in the same. A Deputy is required to carry out a property inspection once a year to ensure the property is safe and secure and should also complete an inventory of contents confirming the total value of the same. If P does still reside in his property, the Deputy is required to review the suitability of the property and consider the rent/mortgage payments to ensure all was in order.

The Deputy is required to gain an insight into P in order to make best interest decisions on their behalf. In order to do this, the Deputy should ensure the necessary capacity assessments have been undertaken and are completely up to date. The Deputy should also discuss P’s wishes and feelings and record details of these appropriately. The Deputy must also maintain regular contact with P and his family and visit P once a year.
By maintaining effective processes and organization, the Deputy must establish clear and effective governance between the named Deputy and staff delegated to carry out the relevant tasks on behalf of P. Necessary supervision should also be given to more junior members of staff and the necessary criteria must be considered whereby a best interests decision is required.


The Deputy must have the necessary skillset and knowledge to carry out the work expected of a professional Deputy. This includes ensuring that the Deputy and all delegated members of staff understand the MCA the Code of Practice and the five statutory principles of the MCA and how they are applied within working practices. The Deputy is required to have sufficient knowledge surrounding inheritance tax provisions and have access to appropriate advice and expertise on the same. Also, the Deputy should have access to appropriate advice and expertise regarding tax returns. Furthermore, should any family conflict arise, the Deputy should have awareness of or experience in managing mediation. Without this, a Deputy would not be able to act in the best interests of P and carry out the necessary work at the level expected of a professional Deputy.


Health and welfare standards only apply to those Deputies who hold a health and welfare Order or both a property and financial affairs and health and welfare Order. Standards include, if DOLS is in place, the Deputy must ensure that this is current and up to date. A Deputy must also ensure that a health assessment or review is carried out every year. It is also necessary for the Deputy to keep all professionals involved within P’s care fully updated with respect all matters.


It is imperative that the Deputy follow these guidelines and adhere to the Deputyship standards. These ensure that the Deputy is acting in the best interests of P. In order to ensure that the Deputy is following these standards, regular assurance visits will be carried out. If a Deputy is found to be not following the standards, an action plan will be agreed and put in place in order to address and rectify any of the areas where improvement is required.


Laura Gillin is an associate in the costs and litigation funding team at Clarion. You can contact her at laura.gillin@clarionsolicitors.com or on 0113 227 3631.

Best Practice for file keeping in the Court of Protection

File keeping can have a big impact on the assessment of a Deputy’s file by the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO). Stephanie Kaye looks at 5 key points about file keeping in the Court of Protection and how to maximise costs recovery.

Stephanie Kaye is a Senior Associate in the Clarion Costs Department, and heads the Court of Protection Costs team. You can contact her on 0113 336 3402 or by email at stephanie.kaye@clarionsolicitors.com. 

What Costs Are Reasonable for a Deputy? JR v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust provides an explanation.

At a glance, the costs of a professional Deputy may seem expensive. However, the level of knowledge and work undertaken by a Deputy justifies these costs, especially in a case where the award was of substantial value. Once broken down, the costs of a Deputy are reasonable and can be justified.

Case summary

The Protected Party is a 24-year old with severe cerebral palsy. He suffered intracranial haemorrhage and brain injury following a traumatic premature birth and during a breech delivery. His litigation friend brought a clinical negligence claim on his behalf, arguing that the Protected Party’s injuries could have been avoided by a caesarean delivery. The Defendant accepted liability as the brain injury could have been avoided.

At the settlement hearing, some heads of loss had been agreed, but the costs of the professional deputy remained in dispute.

All parties accepted that the Protected Party lacked capacity to look after his own financial affairs, and predicted that this would be the case for the remainder of his life time. Therefore, a Professional Deputy was to be appointed; the cost of which continued to be argued.

It was deemed that although the Protected Party’s parents were supportive, it was not appropriate for them to administrate the Protected Party’s financial and property affairs. They had stated that they wanted to work alongside the Deputy, not against them. The Protected Party had some level of understanding and communication, so the Deputy was obliged to liaise directly with him.

What is considered reasonable for Deputyship costs?

For annual management

Year Claimant Costs Defendant Costs Award
1 30,605 plus cost of 2 visits 14,000 inclusive of 2 visits 30,000 inclusive of visits
2 21,492 plus cost of 2 visits 9,000 inclusive of 2 visits 20,000 inclusive of visits
3 17,040 plus cost of 1 visit 8,000 inclusive of 1 visit 15,000 inclusive of visits
4 17,040 plus cost of 1 visit 8,000 inclusive of 1 visit 15,000 inclusive of visits
5 onwards 11,232 plus cost of 1 visit 7,000 inclusive of 1 visit 10,000 inclusive of visits

The parties agreed that for extras such as transfers of Deputies, Wills, co-habitation or pre-nuptial agreements and “crisis payments”, a further £38,160.00 was reasonable.

The Judge allowed a total of £898,993.00.

This judgment can then be compared to the PNBA Facts & Figures 2017/18 (pages 258-288) whereby this outlines what could be classed as reasonable when awarding damages to cover the cost of the claimants Deputyship fees. Please refer to the table below.

Year and Expected Work to be Undertaken During the Deputyship Management Estimated Costs
Deputyship Application £6,638
1st Deputyship Year £32,570
2nd Deputyship Year £23,666
3rd Deputyship Year £19,775
Thereafter annual costs of £15,959 x 21.28 £339,607
Applications for appointment of new Deputy (x2) £7,588
Statutory Will Application £14,538
Contingency for crises £6,360
Preparation of tax returns £600 p.a x 24.28 £14,568
Winding up – single payment £1,800
 

 

Total Costs

 

 

£467,110.00

Finally, it’s noteworthy that all Deputyship costs are assessed by the Senior Courts Cost Office and the fee earners are regularly limited to the SCCO Guideline Hourly Rates whilst costs are awarded for Deputyship work, this is further scrutinised on assessment based on what is reasonable, proportionate and necessary in the Protected Party’s best interests.

If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact Georgia Clarke or the team at COPCosts@clarionsolicitors.com