Neil Sands
An employment advocate says she is looking at scaling back her legal aid work after discovering her government-funded opponents in a routine case were paid more than 20 times the amount she received.
Christchurch-based Ashleigh Fechney said the Inland Revenue Department’s (IRD) spent $160,163.17 in legal fees defending a personal grievance case brought by employee DQJ after she was terminated.
Fechney, who represented DQJ, was paid around $6,000 by the legal aid scheme.
“It’s a bit of a slap in the face, to be honest,” she told LawNews after learning of the discrepancy in payments via an Official Information Act (OIA) request lodged with IRD.
Unlock this article and all PREMIUM content by subscribing to LawNews
Already a subscriber?
The other side of legal aid which needs to be emphasised, is the amount of time complying with the requirements for legal aid. Whenever you want to depart from the fixed fee, you need to prepare an amendment to grant which is not automatically allowed. A complex case will often require a number of amendments and it is always uncertain as to whether you will get appropriate funding. The other feature of this however is that I cannot understand the level of fees apparently incurred by Inland Revenue. That seems completely outrageous. But I agree with Ashleigh that her fees are completely inadequate, and explain why very few lawyers are now willing to become legal aid providers
How could it have cost $160 k to settle a pg? I have taken a case to the the ERA where we won / successfully defended the appeal in the Employment Court – and again in the Court of Appeal – and all of that work over 2 years cost about $100 k. Lucky for IRD they have free money from taxpayers to pay their lawyers . .