The Background

R v Barts Health NHS Trust (2022)

At a judicial review hearing in 2019 Mr Justice MacDonald held that the continuation of life-sustaining medical treatment was in the best interests of Tafida Raqeeb, a 5 year old girl who had been left with extensive and irreversible damage to her brain as a result of a non-traumatic brain injury.

The trust was ordered to pay 80% of the claimant’s costs, and there was a detailed assessment of the claimant’s bill of costs. 

The Issues

There was disagreement on the applicable hourly rate. The defendant argued:

1. the degree of legal complexity, whilst grave and complex, ‘was the sort that experienced counsel on both sides would be familiar with’.
2. the defendants had utilised senior counsel so a high level of expertise by the defendant’s solicitors was unnecessary and the defendant should be awarded a reduced hourly rate.

The claimant argued that ‘the level of skill, effort and specialised knowledge of the claimant’s solicitors was necessary to be able to pursue such a case. It was literally a life-or-death decision that was involved in the proceedings.’