This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/01/phone-hacking-trial-rebekah-brooks-costs

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Phone-hacking trial: Rebekah Brooks drops costs application Phone-hacking trial: Rebekah Brooks drops costs application
(about 4 hours later)
Rebekah Brooks has dropped her application for her legal costs of up to £7m relating to the marathon phone-hacking trial to be reimbursed by taxpayer. Rebekah Brooks has dropped her application for the taxpayer to reimburse her legal costs of up to £7m relating to the marathon phone-hacking trial.
She has abandoned plans to recoup the money after News UK – the News Corp subsidiary that under a previous guise as News International published the now-defunct News of the World – which was indemnifying her costs, said it would not be seeking to be reimbursed after she was cleared of all charges. She dropped the claim after News UK – the News Corp subsidiary that under a previous guise as News International published the now-defunct News of the World – which was indemnifying her costs, said it would not be seeking to be reimbursed following her acquittal on all charges.
The publisher’s decision also means other defendants in the trial who were indemnified by News UK also acquitted have dropped their cost claims. The publisher’s decision also means other cleared defendants in the trial who were indemnified by News UK have dropped their cost claims.
News UK’s decision saves the taxpayer millions of pounds and was made because the company did not wish to become embroiled in a protracted argument about its case.News UK’s decision saves the taxpayer millions of pounds and was made because the company did not wish to become embroiled in a protracted argument about its case.
Robert Smith QC, for News UK, said the “sheer scale” of the exercise of assessing costs had become clear and this had “troubled” the company. Robert Smith QC, for News UK, said the sheer scale of the exercise of assessing costs had become clear and this had troubled the company.
“It is for that reason that News UK have indicated it did not feel willing to engage in an exercise addressing these issues,” said Smith.“It is for that reason that News UK have indicated it did not feel willing to engage in an exercise addressing these issues,” said Smith.
A spokesperson for News UK said: “Given the certainty that our costs would continue to increase disproportionately, we’ve taken the pragmatic view not to seek repayment from the defendants for legal costs borne by the company.”A spokesperson for News UK said: “Given the certainty that our costs would continue to increase disproportionately, we’ve taken the pragmatic view not to seek repayment from the defendants for legal costs borne by the company.”
News UK’s decision not to reclaim costs, although expensive, means it avoids a potentially damaging and protracted scrutiny of its stance during and before the trial.News UK’s decision not to reclaim costs, although expensive, means it avoids a potentially damaging and protracted scrutiny of its stance during and before the trial.
In a hearing in July Saunders warned that when it came to costs applications: “I have to consider whether any defendant brought it on themselves and also whether I would have to consider News Intenational conduct in relation to the matter.” In a hearing in July Mr Justice Saunders warned that when it came to costs applications: “I have to consider whether any defendant brought it on themselves and also whether I would have to consider News International conduct in relation to the matter.”
Although News UK was not a party to the trial, it told the defendants it no longer wanted to be the beneficiary of any costs order.Although News UK was not a party to the trial, it told the defendants it no longer wanted to be the beneficiary of any costs order.
Brooks’s counsel said she had never intended to try and recover any personal expenses in relation to the trial, which would have included rent of a Georgian townhouse in Bloomsbury, 15 minutes’ walk from the court. Brooks’s counsel said she had never intended to try to recover any personal expenses in relation to the trial, which would have included rent of a Georgian townhouse in Bloomsbury, central London, 15 minutes’ walk from the court.
It is believed the costs for Brooks were between £5m and £7m, with the total for the other defendants running to several million. It is believed the costs for the former News International chief executive were between £5m and £7m, with the total for the other defendants running to several million.
Two of the six defendants acquitted in the trial are however seeking all, or a portion of their costs.Two of the six defendants acquitted in the trial are however seeking all, or a portion of their costs.
Charlie Brooks, husband of the former chief executive of Rebekah Brooks, is seeking ballpark costs of £600,000 including VAT. Rebekah Brooks’s husband Charlie is seeking ballpark costs of £600,000 including VAT.
Stuart Kuttner, former managing editor of the News of the World, is seeking £135,000 of costs incurred before News UK indemnified him in January 2013. Stuart Kuttner, former managing editor of the News of the World, is seeking £135,000 of costs incurred before News UK indemnified him in January last year.
Robert Smith QC told Mr Justice Saunders at the Old Bailey hearing that “News UK would not seek or accept any part of any order by way of costs of central funds, public funds”. Smith told Saunders at the Old Bailey hearing: “News UK would not seek or accept any part of any order by way of costs of central funds, public funds.”
It is believed the company’s decision was made in the last 24 hours.It is believed the company’s decision was made in the last 24 hours.
It emerged during the hearing at the Old Bailey that News UK had indemnified Brooks for her legal costs. It emerged during the hearing that News UK had indemnified Brooks for her legal costs.
Brooks’s counsel, Jonathan Laidlaw QC, told Saunders that “any money that would have been subject to a claims cost order would have gone immediately to News to compensate them for the financial support they were good enough to afford her during her trial”. Brooks’s counsel, Jonathan Laidlaw QC, told Saunders: “Any money that would have been subject to a claims cost order would have gone immediately to News to compensate them for the financial support they were good enough to afford her during her trial.”
He said that “As News’s position is that they do not want to receive any costs from this trial ... I formally withdraw the application on her behalf.” He said: “As News’s position is that they do not want to receive any costs from this trial ... I formally withdraw the application on her behalf.”
News UK had also indemnified the legal costs incurred by the company’s head of security Mark Hanna, Brooks former secretary Cheryl Carter, and security guard Paul Edwards. News UK had also indemnified the legal costs incurred by the company’s head of security Mark Hanna, Brooks’s former secretary Cheryl Carter, and security guard Paul Edwards.
They also will not be making applications for costs, the judge was told.They also will not be making applications for costs, the judge was told.