R v Mafune

Under Schedule 2 to Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, special preparation may be paid for work reasonably required to review electronic prosecution evidence exceeding 10,000 pages, even where some of that evidence has counted towards the capped graduated fee. The claim is not confined to electronic material excluded from the PPE count. Where key prosecution evidence is extracted from a category of electronic data, that category will normally be included, subject to case-specific assessment. Material merely of interest to the defence and not central to the trial does not qualify. Spreadsheet page counts may be reduced by sensible approximation to remove blank, empty or obviously irrelevant material. The appeal succeeded within the original scope of the claim.

Kamrans Solicitors represented the Defendant in the Crown Court at Leeds and claimed special preparation payment for reviewing telephone-download reports served in spreadsheet form. The non-electronic PPE count was 871, while the electronic evidence took the total above the 10,000-page cap for the graduated fee. The Legal Aid Agency Determining Officer allowed 60 hours, treating special preparation as confined to non-PPE electronic material.

The appeal concerned a claim originally limited to 342 hours and 36 minutes reviewing chat data, together with an apparent further claim concerning an Applications Usage worksheet. The central issues were whether special preparation under Schedule 2 paragraph 20(1)(b) could cover electronic PPE exceeding the cap, how spreadsheet pages should be counted, and whether the additional worksheet formed part of the claim or qualifying PPE.

Decision and applicable approach

1. The appeal succeeded. Under Schedule 2 paragraph 20(1)(b) of the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, special preparation may be paid for reasonable work required to read electronic PPE exceeding 10,000 pages. The provision is not confined to electronic material excluded from the PPE count. Evidence counted towards the capped graduated fee may also support a special preparation claim for the excess.
2. The assessment should begin by determining the total PPE count, including electronic evidence that properly qualifies as PPE. The excess over 10,000 pages must then be identified. The award is based on hours reasonably required, assessed in all relevant circumstances, rather than by a fixed minutes-per-page formula.
3. The court applied the case-specific central-importance criterion identified in Lord Chancellor v SVS Solicitors [2017] EWHC 1045 (QB). It also applied the approach in Lord Chancellor v Edward Hayes LLP & Anor [2017] EWHC 138 (QB), under which the underlying electronic data from which key prosecution evidence is extracted will normally be included. Material merely helpful, important or of interest to the defence, rather than central to the trial, does not qualify.
4. Spreadsheet page counts require sensible approximation. Following The Lord Chancellor v Lam & Meerbux Solicitors [2023] EWHC 1186 (KB), blank pages, empty messages and obviously irrelevant material could be filtered from the estimate. The original claim could not be enlarged to include the separately recorded Applications Usage worksheet. In any event, that data was not shown to have been relied on by the Crown or to have been of central importance, so it could not support a claim under paragraph 20(1)(b).
5. The court calculated 61,800 pages for the Chats worksheet in one spreadsheet and 4,512 pages in the other, totalling 66,312 pages. After deducting the 9,129 electronic pages already included within the capped PPE count, 57,183 excess pages remained. The claim of 342 hours and 36 minutes was reasonable, and that amount was allowed. A further £500 exclusive of VAT for costs and the £100 paid on appeal were also ordered.

1. High Court (Senior Courts Costs Office) — On the appeal under Regulation 29 of the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013, reported at [2026] EWHC 2246 (SCCO) , the appeal succeeded. Remuneration for 342 hours and 36 minutes of special preparation was directed, together with the stated costs.
2. Legal Aid Agency Determining Officer — Allowed 60 hours after treating special preparation as confined to non-PPE electronic material and excluding overlap with PPE counted for the graduated fee.