Court charges to be scrapped

[najaB]

Something to keep in mind when providing advice - criminal court charges are to be abolished from Dec 24th.

The criminal courts charge is to be scrapped from 24 December, Justice Secretary Michael Gove has announced.

Since April, convicted criminals in England and Wales have had to pay a charge of between £150 and £1,200 towards the cost of their case.

But Mr Gove said "while the intention behind the policy was honourable in reality that intent has fallen short".

MPs had called for it to be axed and the Magistrates Association said the decision was "tremendously welcome".

The charge is paid on top of fines, compensation orders and defendants' own legal charges, and is higher for those convicted after pleading not guilty.

It is set according to the type of case, with the minimum charge for magistrates' courts and the maximum level for crown court cases.

'Perverse incentives'

In March, the then Justice Secretary Chris Grayling said the fee would ensure that criminals "pay their way".

But MPs on the Justice Committee published a report in November in which they said the fee, which is not means-tested, created "serious problems" and was often "grossly disproportionate".

The cross-party group's chairman, Conservative MP Bob Neill, said they evidence they had received raised "grave misgivings" about the fee's benefits and whether it was "compatible with the principles of justice".

He said it created "perverse incentives - not only for defendants to plead guilty but for sentencers to reduce awards of compensation and prosecution costs".

BBC News

 

[DaveNewcastle]

There's a couple of Magistrates who post on this forum who I know will be releived by this. . . . as will hundreds others across the land.

The Legal section of the forum's RailUK Fares & Ticketing Guide wasn't even amended to include this short-lived abhorrence.

 

[mikeg]

I have to say that whilst it is hard to have any sympathy for the common criminal, I have always been suspicious of this charge for various reasons and welcome its scrapping. For once the government is taking an enlightened view on 'Laura Norder'...

The reasons are that principally justice should be free. You should receive your 'just desserts' in court and nothing more, not a 'double whammy' of a criminal court charge, which has the potential to be larger than the size of the fine.

Secondly, whilst recognising the value of a reduction in 'punishment' for a guilty plea, in a common law system which is often vague and open to interpretation*, I think people should have a right to test the law should there be a grey area and not come too much worse off for it.

* Yes, I know in the majority of cases that precedent has already been set and that the lower courts themselves cannot set precedent, but there are still the odd areas open for interpretation.

 

[Fare-Cop]

short-lived abhorrence.

Amen to that

 

[Tetchytyke]

Secondly, whilst recognising the value of a reduction in 'punishment' for a guilty plea, in a common law system which is often vague and open to interpretation*, I think people should have a right to test the law should there be a grey area and not come too much worse off for it

The problem wasn't "testing the law"- as a general rule the law is pretty clear on most issues- the problem was people pleading guilty to things they didn't do because the threat of the crippling court charge was too much to risk.

Gove was a disaster at education, but whisper it quietly, he's not doing a bad job at all at the MoJ.

 

[Puffing Devil]

Hurrah! Too late for some as they have already left the bench in protest

 

[DarloRich]

Very good news. In my view the Conservatives have ( and are) using the court fee system to limit access to justice.

BTW @Davenewcastle: MAGS hanging about in this forum? I best behave

( I used to like magistrates court work. Much more earthy than the Crown Court, if less salubrious)