R v Tyrone Barton

This case involved an appeal by EBR Attridge LLP against a decision by the Legal Aid Agency regarding the classification of a hearing under the Litigator's Graduated Fees Scheme (LGFS).

TLDR:

• EBR Attridge LLP appealed a decision by the Legal Aid Agency.
• The dispute centered on whether a hearing should be classified as a trial or a 'cracked trial'.
• The court ruled in favor of the Legal Aid Agency, classifying the hearing as a 'cracked trial'.

The appellant, EBR Attridge LLP, represented Mr. Tyrone Barton who was charged with conspiracy to supply Class A and B drugs. Initially pleading not guilty, Barton later changed his plea to guilty for some counts, leading to a complex sentencing process.

At the core of the dispute was whether the hearing on 29th June 2023 should be classified and remunerated as a trial or a 'cracked trial'. The appellant argued that the hearing constituted a Newton hearing, which would qualify it as a trial under the LGFS.

The court examined the relevant regulations, specifically the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013. It also considered previous case law, including R v. Hodo and R v. Makengele, which provided guidance on what constitutes a Newton hearing.

The appellant contended that extensive submissions made by both the prosecution and the defense during the hearing were akin to a Newton hearing. They argued that these submissions were necessary for determining Barton's sentence.

However, the respondent, the Legal Aid Agency, argued that the hearing did not involve disputed facts requiring litigation but rather differing interpretations of agreed-upon facts. They cited the case of R v. Shehu to support their position.

Costs Judge Whalan concluded that the hearing on 29th June 2023 should be classified as a 'cracked trial'. He noted that while there were disputed emphases regarding Barton's role, the core facts were agreed upon, and the hearing did not meet the criteria for a Newton hearing.

The appeal was dismissed, and the classification of the hearing as a 'cracked trial' was upheld, impacting the remuneration under the LGFS.

Legal representatives: EBR Attridge LLP for the appellant.

Judicial Panel: Costs Judge Whalan

Case Citation Reference: [2024] EWHC 1328 (SCCO)