Court fees need to be revised, £10,000 isn't enough

Courts minister Shailesh Vara could further increase the already eye-watering sum of £10,000 for court fees to £20,000 under proposals published this week.

The consultation states a properly funded service which protects access to justice is needed, and if that is to be achieved while reducing the cost of the courts and tribunals to the taxpayer, then deciding what court fees should be charged must again be revisited.

Along with a second fee hike, wives and husbands wanting to end their marriage could have to spend £550 for a civil court hearing in England and Wales, an increase of £140; issuing a possession claim in the county court would cost £335 instead of £280 under the proposals; and the cost for general applications in civil proceedings would double from £50 to £100.

The introduction of a £10,000 price tag to bring a claim through the courts caused uproar in the profession, with the Lord Chief Justice, the Civil Justice Council, and the Bar Council objecting to the fees, arguing it would restrict access to justice and cripple small to medium-sized businesses. Until March 2015, a claim for £200,000 would have cost £1,515. Vara is hoping to recoup £48m from the fee increases.

The Law Society president Jonathan Smithers said: 'The government introduced dramatic hikes to court fees just months ago. These latest proposals will increase fees by up to 1,320 per cent for some cases. They will deny individuals and small businesses access to justice, crippling them when trying to recover monies owed to them.

'All civil cases, from those filing for divorce to landlords needing their property back, are affected by these latest punitive increases which are tantamount to selling justice like a commodity, leaving it out of reach for many ordinary people. This will only serve to widen the access to justice gap in our two tier justice system.'

In May of this year, Richard Thomas, senior partner at DTM Legal, said that given the Conservatives's reputation as the 'party of business,' it was surprising they were happy to allow smaller businesses to be held in a chokehold.

Laura Clenshaw is managing editor of Solicitors Journal

@SJ_weekly