A legal charity is set for a £10,000 windfall after a firm’s pro bono work helped win a parking dispute.
London firm Keidan Harrison secured the order in favour of the Access to Justice Foundation after acting pro bono for client Hannah Robinson.
She had been pursued for more than £11,000 by Excel Parking Services after it was submitted she had failed to pay within the required five minutes to park at the site in Darlington. Robinson said that she had paid for a ticket on each occasion but the transaction had not always gone through within five minutes due to poor internet connection in the car park.
Having initially paid the fines, Robinson started appealing them in late 2022 and ended up with 67 unpaid £100 charges, along with a £70 debt collection fee for each.
Her story had appeared on the BBC News website last year and she was contacted by Keidan Harrison offering free support. The firm believed Robinson was being treated unfairly and also took the view that defending the claim against her would benefit others more widely.
Last month, the firm was successful in obtaining the dismissal of the claim at trial in Middlesbrough County Court before District Judge Richards. Robinson was represented by dispute resolution paralegal Anya Prasad who was supervised by co-founding partner Luke Harrison and who instructed pro bono counsel Seth Kitson of Trinity Chambers.
The claim was defended on the basis that a £100 charge for not paying within five minutes of arrival was an unenforceable penalty as it served no legitimate purpose, and that, in any event, such a term was ‘unfair’ under section 62 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
The judge dismissed the claim and made an indemnity costs order against Excel on the basis that its litigation conduct had been ‘unreasonable’ and out of the norm.
As a result, Excel Parking was ordered to pay pro bono costs of £10,240.10 to the Access to Justice Foundation within 14 days. The company has said it intends to appeal.
Following the decision, Harrison said: ‘This case demonstrates the importance of pro bono work. It was small in value by the standards of city firms but important and of significant value to Hannah who has been pursued in a totally unacceptable way.’
He added that the existence of pro bono costs orders was said by the Court of Appeal in Manolete v White to level the playing field so far as costs risk is concerned, which helps further the overriding objective of the Civil Procedure Rules. A pro bono costs order also has the effect of funding unrelated pro bono work furthering access to justice for society.
This article is now closed for comment.
4 Readers' comments