Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Can anyone tell me what this means regarding court costs?

6 replies

gigglinggoblin · 03/07/2010 10:36

Just been through court re residency and contact. Xp gets legal aid, I dont so didnt have a solicitor. On bottom of court order I just received it says 'Costs of mother shall be assessed as Civil Procedure Rules 47.17 provides'. What on earth does that mean? He started it all off, am I going to have to pay for it? It just seems hugely unfair if thats the case. I have read the 47.17 paragraph and it makes no sense to me at all so if anyone can explain I would be really grateful.

OP posts:
mumblechum · 03/07/2010 15:52

I can't remember what rule 47.17 says off the top of my head and am at home so can't look it up. If you can cut and paste it I'll try to translate.

In general, the court doesn't make costs orders in Children Act cases.

What was the result of the proceedings?

mumblechum · 03/07/2010 15:56

Actually, have just looked it up on Google.

It's for a detailed assessment of an assisted person's costs. It therefore sounds to me like a typo, and it's the ex's costs which are being referred to. I'd contact the other side's solicitors topoint it out and they can arrange to have the order amended under the Slip Rule (which is used for typos like this).

BTW detailed assesment means that because your ex's costs were quite high, his solicitors have to prepare a very detailed bill before the legal services commission pay it, and the court can knock a bit off if it's too high. It won't affect you at all.

gigglinggoblin · 03/07/2010 20:44

phew! Thanks so much for that, I really hoped it was a typo! Quite glad to hear that they might dispute his costs, he is constantly using legal aid as he has been on benefits for ever and it really irritates me. You have saved me a weekend of worry, I really appreciate your reply

OP posts:
gigglinggoblin · 03/07/2010 20:47

oh and result was a minor amendment to the contact he has and several conditions put on it, he was going for shared residency (for the third or fourth time), I have always had residency and still do.

OP posts:
mumblechum · 05/07/2010 05:23

Annoyingly for you, if the court does knock some money off, his solicitors have to swallow the shortfall, they can't ask him for it.

gigglinggoblin · 05/07/2010 21:03

oh. that is annoying. but it might make his next solicitor think twice, he has a different one every time. he should run out of local ones soon.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page