Meeting the costs of translation.
In the matter of Z (A Child) [2017] EWCA Civ 157
The Court of Appeal outlined the approach to translation and interpretation costs and disapproved of a 'rule' that the costs should fall on the party who
produces the document. In particular the obligation of disclosure required
documents to be produced which might be ‘against interest’ and so it could not
be a general rule that in producing the document the party was deploying it for
his benefit.
The Court of Appeal judgment approves the following
approach
a) Interpretation in court is the responsibility of
HMCTS
b) Out of court interpretation falls to an
individual party's public funding certificates
c) The cost of translating pre-proceeding documents
falls to the local authority in any event (LAA Guidance on Remuneration of
Expert Witnesses paragraph 6.21)
d) Only those documents which are necessary should
be translated (Re L)
e) Which documents need to be translated is a
matter which needs to be determined during the case (and probably done on a
Section of the Bundle basis….)
f) The determination of which document should be
translated has to be made by the judge if the parties are unable to agree or a
likelihood the LAA will not accept the disbursement has been reasonably
incurred.
g) Once that decision has been made, the burden of
paying for the translation of a document will depend on the context
- where
they relate to establishment of threshold the Local Authoruty should usually
pay subject to the caveat that:
"it is essential to focus on the forensic
context… it is necessary for K to understand the case as a whole and to be
aware of the important substance – not the fine details – of the various other
witness statements, reports and assessments". (See Re L (Procedure:
Bundles: Translation) above).
-
In other
cases it may be appropriate for the party who seeks to adduce it to meet a
burden which falls on him to meet the costs
-
However there
is no definitive rule; all must depend on the circumstances of the cases.
