A judge could soon decide a small claim on the papers even if one party objects. That consultation closed on 31 July. Three other things moved this fortnight. Advocates’ graduated fees rose for representation orders from 28 July. The Family Procedure Rules gained a permission stage for appeals from lay justices. And the Legal Aid Agency opened the door to new inquest contracts.
Could a judge decide a small claim without a hearing?
The Civil Procedure Rule Committee has consulted on amendments to CPR Part 27 and Practice Direction 27A. The change would let a judge decide a small claim on the papers. All parties would no longer have to agree.
Consent is the current safeguard. A judge can already deal with a small claim on the papers, but only if everyone agrees. Removing that condition puts the decision in the judge’s hands.
The consultation also proposes modernising the terminology used across Part 27.
It closed on 31 July 2026, so the story now is what emerges rather than how to respond. Watch for CPRC minutes, a draft rule, or a Practice Direction Update carrying the change.
The practical question for firms is advice, not procedure. If a judge can drop the hearing over a client’s objection, the sums change. Whether attending is worth the cost becomes a live question. It changes most for litigants in person, who make up a large share of the small claims track.
Advocates’ fees rise for orders dated from 28 July
Certain Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme rates increased for representation orders dated on or after 28 July 2026.
The cut-off is the date on the representation order, not the date the work was done. Orders made a day either side of 28 July attract different rates. That matters when billing a matter that straddles the change.
The Legal Aid Agency also published new guidance on expert witness costs in criminal legal aid. It covers prescribed rates and when to seek prior authority.
This sits apart from the wider scheme reform now out for consultation. The Legal Brief covers that in its report on the AGFS proposals. One is a rate change already in force. The other is a structural consultation closing on 26 August.
What changed in the Family Procedure Rules?
The Family Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2026 came into force on 20 July 2026. One change alters appeal practice directly.
Appeals from decisions of lay justices in the family court now require permission. Applications for permission go to the appeal court. A practitioner who previously appealed as of right now faces an extra hurdle. The practical window to advise is shorter too.
The rules also extend rule 29.1. A party in a case with several parties can now ask the court to keep their contact details private.
Separately, Practice Direction Update No.4 of 2026 took effect on 11 July 2026. It extends the PD36ZI pilot on notifying police of certain Family Law Act orders until 13 July 2027.
Legal Aid Agency prepares for a surge in inquest work
The Legal Aid Agency published a headline intentions document in late July. It will shortly invite firms to tender for new inquest legal aid contracts.
The driver is the Public Office (Accountability) Bill, the Hillsborough Law. It would create a duty of candour for public officials. It would also give bereaved families non-means-tested legal aid at inquests where a public authority is an interested person.
The projected volume is the striking part. Government estimates put legally aided inquests rising from 200 to 400 today, to as many as 11,400.
The LAA plans to offer an unlimited number of contracts. No fixed cap applies to the volume a contract holder takes. The Bill has passed the Commons and awaits second reading in the Lords. A carry-over motion in April kept it alive into the current session.
The inquest tender is the item to act on. Legally aided inquests could rise nearly thirtyfold, with no cap on contract volumes. That is real work for inquest and inquiry teams. Engagement like this normally runs weeks ahead of a procurement round, so the window to prepare is now.
Added days for prison adjudications double
Regulations made in 2026 have doubled the days that independent adjudication can add to a sentence. The cap moves from 42 to 84.
Added days move the release point. Independent adjudicators sit outside the prison’s own governor structure, and the higher ceiling gives them more room. For a defence practitioner the effect is simple. A client’s release date can shift after sentence, on a decision taken inside the prison.
The mechanism survives the Sentencing Act 2026. It applies whichever release regime operates, which makes it load-bearing for any release date worked out this summer.
The wider release picture remains unsettled. The Prime Minister paused the Act’s automatic release changes on 25 July. The Legal Brief sets out that position in its report on the review.
Can a legal aid fee scheme be challenged in court?
An Irish case is testing exactly that, and practitioners here are watching.
Criminal defence solicitors in Ireland have withdrawn services. The dispute is a flat fee of 520 euro per client in the District Court. It took effect on 1 July 2026, replacing a fee of roughly 240 euro plus 60 euro per later hearing. Thousands of cases have stalled.
A solicitor, John Quinn, is asking the High Court to quash the statutory instrument behind the model. His case, as put to the court, is that the flat fee conflicts with the Criminal Justice (Legal Aid) Act 1962. The argument is that it stops judges granting certificates charge by charge. Those are submissions. The court has not ruled.
The reason it travels is the model. Ministers here have floated a fee per client rather than per hearing too. Whichever way the court rules, the outcome will feature in arguments about criminal legal aid rates in England and Wales.
The instrument doubling added days is SI 2026/664. The Ministry of Justice publishes Family Procedure Rules updates on its own site. The Law Society Gazette reported the inquest tender in LAA prepares for Hillsborough Law with new tender.