R v Chapman

For the purpose of calculating a criminal graduated fee, prosecution evidence page counts must reflect a reliable and non-duplicative measure of the material served. Where electronic documents exist in several formats, including spreadsheet print-preview versions producing anomalous or inflated page counts, the court may reject counts it cannot properly verify. A count based on the appropriate PDF versions may be used, together with any figure properly conceded by the Legal Aid Agency. Partial success on an appeal may justify an award of appeal costs, while the amount allowed should reflect the limited extent of success.

DPP Law Ltd appealed under Regulation 29 of the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013 against the number of pages of prosecution evidence allowed by the determining officer when calculating the graduated fee for representing Connor Chapman.

The paper evidence comprised 1,549 pages. Including electronic evidence, the determining officer calculated 2,115 pages. During the appeal, the Legal Aid Agency accepted that the calculation should be increased and conceded a total of 3,000 pages. The dispute concerned whether substantially larger counts derived from Excel spreadsheets and their PDF conversions should also be included.

1. The appeal was allowed in part. The graduated fee was directed to be recalculated on the basis of 3,000 pages of prosecution evidence, being the figure conceded by the Legal Aid Agency.

2. The appeal concerned quantification only. There was no dispute about service or relevance, and no issue arose concerning the nature or importance of the documents.

3. The determining officer had generally allowed documents described as PDF versions. That was conventionally the appropriate format for calculating prosecution evidence pages, even where Excel functionality was used in conducting the case. The appellant did not seek payment for duplicated formats.

4. The court could not be satisfied that the substantially larger Excel and converted-spreadsheet counts were proper page counts. The figures were anomalous, included apparent subsets or duplicated formats, and were difficult to reconcile with the corresponding pure PDF counts. The concern identified by Cotter J in Lord Chancellor v Lam and Meerbux Solicitors about excessive remuneration resulting from blank pages generated by such formats supported that conclusion.

5. Although the appeal process had increased the recoverable page count from 2,115 to 3,000, the appellant had not established the full amount claimed. The appellant was therefore entitled to appeal costs, but the award was limited to £1,250 exclusive of VAT, together with the £100 paid on appeal.

• High Court (Senior Court Costs Office): appeal by DPP Law Ltd against the determining officer’s prosecution-evidence page calculation was allowed in part. The graduated fee was ordered to be recalculated using 3,000 pages, with an award of appeal costs.