REGINA v JARIR

For the purposes of the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, a case is not a cracked trial merely because it was listed for trial before the defendant entered a plea. Where the case is later disposed of by a guilty plea at the first hearing at which the defendant enters a plea, the guilty plea fee is payable unless the statutory definition of a cracked trial is otherwise satisfied. The Regulations must be applied according to their terms. Administrative listing of a trial and payment of a different fee to counsel do not alter the statutory classification.

M&A Solicitors represented Adam Jarir in Crown Court proceedings involving two counts of conspiracy to supply Class A drugs. The defendant was not arraigned at an ineffective Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing, although the case was listed for trial. He later pleaded guilty at the first effective hearing at which he entered a plea, and the case proceeded to sentence.

The Determining Officer allowed only a guilty plea fee. The solicitors appealed under regulation 29 of the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, relying on R v Williams. The central issue was whether Schedule 2 paragraph 1(1)(b) applied where a case was listed for trial before a hearing at which the defendant entered a plea.

1. Appeal dismissed. The question was whether the statutory definition of a cracked trial applied, not whether the trial had been listed for administrative purposes or whether counsel had received a cracked trial fee.
2. Schedule 2 paragraph 1(1)(a) requires the assisted person to enter a not guilty plea at the first hearing at which he or she enters a plea. That condition was not satisfied because the defendant pleaded guilty at his first effective plea hearing.
3. Schedule 2 paragraph 1(1)(b), providing for a case listed for trial without a hearing at which the assisted person enters a plea, means that no such plea hearing has taken place. It does not cover a case listed for trial before the plea hearing later occurs.
4. The court followed the reasoning in R v Malik, R v Barzey and R v Lamin. The 2015 amendments removed references to plea and case management hearings to accommodate procedural changes, without altering the fees payable. R v Rahman therefore remained applicable.
5. R v Williams, although factually similar, was not followed. A contrary construction would extend the cracked trial definition to cases listed for trial before a plea even where the case proceeded to a full trial, which could not have been intended.

The fee payable was accordingly the guilty plea fee.

The judgment records an appeal under regulation 29 of the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013 against the Determining Officer’s fee decision. The High Court (Senior Courts Costs Office) dismissed the appeal.