Collins Solicitors Publishes Judicial Review Papers
Collins Solicitors has today published the application it has made seeking Judicial Review of a decision of the Infected Blood Inquiry.
The application names core participant Jason Evans as Claimant and the Chair, Sir Brian Langstaff, as Defendant.
The intention of the application is to seek review of the decision to refuse an application made by Collins Solicitors on 25th February 2020 to increase a financial award, made for the purpose of reviewing approximately 3,288 disclosed documents (more than 15,000 pages), and for failing to give reasons for this refusal.
The original award, made by the Inquiry on 16th January 2020, allowed 120 hours for the task which was expected to cover all legal work including preparation, attendance and correspondence in connection with the disclosure of 3,288 documents relating to the A and Others litigation. Collins Solicitors represent more than 1,400 people in total, 1,101 of whom are core participants, in the ongoing Inquiry process. This request for Judicial Review seeks that the decision made on 25th February 2020 should be quashed and reconsidered.
Des Collins, Senior Partner at Collins Solicitors, representing over 1,400 people in relation to the Infected Blood Public Inquiry, comments:
“This – and any – Public Inquiry process can only work if there is a level playing field in all respects for all those involved, and that includes finances. The original award allows only 25% of the time commonly allowed for document consideration and makes any relevant advice on the material simply impossible.
The claimant in this case is one of Collins’ core participant clients and is brought on his behalf in the interests of proportionality, but it could equally have been brought for any of our other 1,100 core participant clients and will benefit them equally.
The Inquiry is duty bound to provide fair funding for the representation of those infected and affected by this terrible tragedy – those for whom this Inquiry was set up – and where that task cannot be completed within the limits of the award made to us, we have an obligation to our clients to challenge that award, otherwise we are not providing legal representation, we are merely legitimising an unacceptable process”.
