Access To Justice Foundation Pro-Bono Costs Project
The pro-bono costs scheme was introduced in October 2008. It allows a court (County Court, High Court, Court of Appeal Civil Division and Supreme Court) to award costs where a party was represented pro-bono. The paying party is required to pay the costs ordered to the Access to Justice Foundation, which then distributes the funds to agencies and projects that support the provision of free legal assistance.

The legislative basis of the scheme is Section 194 of the Legal Services Act 2007, under which the Access to Justice Foundation is the prescribed charity for receipt of pro-bono costs.

CPR 46.7 and Practice Direction 46 set out the procedural rules specifically relevant to the pro-bono costs scheme. Pursuant to CPR 46.7(4), the general costs provisions in CPR 44 to 47 apply where appropriate, with certain specified modifications.

Pro-bono costs can also be included in settlement agreements and consent orders, in the same way as legal costs where parties are represented.

Sign in to Google to save your progress. Learn more
Are you a barrister or a solicitor? *
If you are neither a barrister or a solicitor, please provide brief details of your role.
How many pro-bono cases have you worked on over the last three years?
To what extent are you aware of the pro-bono costs scheme? Have you received any training on the scheme?
How many cases have you been involved in that were eligible for pro-bono costs? (For the purposes of this question, please treat first instance and any appeal stages as a single case.)
Of those cases, in how many was an application made for a pro-bono costs order after the conclusion of litigation proceedings?
If no application was made, please provide brief reasons.
If an application was made, what was the result?
In how many of those cases were pro-bono costs agreed as part of a settlement agreement?
What resources, if any, were consulted in the context of any pro-bono costs application? Are there any additional resources that you think would be useful?
In the cases that you have been involved in, were any judicial comments made on the nature and/or importance of pro-bono costs?
In your experience, what are the main reasons why a case that might otherwise be eligible for pro-bono costs may be brought to an end prior to the pro-bono costs application stage? (For example: initial start-up costs, worries about having to pay an opponent’s costs.)
Do you think that the remit of pro-bono costs should be extended, for example to tribunals and the coroner’s court?
Do you have any other thoughts or information on the pro-bono costs scheme which may be useful for this research, in particular as to the number of pro-bono costs applications and orders might be increased?
Submit
Clear form
Never submit passwords through Google Forms.
This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google. Report Abuse - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
Google Forms