Court orders solicitor Robin Makin to pay £250k after failed GDPR claim against agency.
Solicitor advocate Robin Makin has been ordered to pay £250,000 in legal costs after a failed attempt to sue The Transcription Agency under the UK’s data protection laws.
Makin, best known for representing notorious serial killer Ian Brady, had brought proceedings in 2021 against the transcription firm and Master Jennifer James, a costs judge. He claimed the defendants held personal data about him in breach of the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR. The claim, however, was dismissed after the defendants successfully relied on the judicial exemption.
The tribunal later described Makin’s action as a “grave attempt to besmirch” the reputation of Master James.
In Makin v The Transcription Agency LLP & Anor, the solicitor of Liverpool Legal was ordered to pay the defendants’ costs on the indemnity basis. The costs mounted following a detailed assessment process held in November 2024 and again in June 2025 before Deputy Costs Judge Lightman.
Judge Lightman noted that Makin had challenged almost every item on the bill, which contained close to 1,400 entries. That challenge, he ruled, was wholly unreasonable. As a result, he ordered Makin to pay the costs of the assessment itself — £46,541.40.
Embed from Getty ImagesThe detailed assessment further determined that The Transcription Agency’s bill totalled £177,938.46, which Makin was also ordered to cover. On top of this, he was directed to pay £16,154.64 in interest on the bill, plus two additional costs schedules: £6,320 from October 2024 and £2,822 from July 2025.
This brought the final sum payable to £249,776.50.
Court records show that Makin had already paid £240,731.21 on account in four instalments — one in September 2023 and three more during 2025. That left him with a balance of £9,045.29, which he was ordered to pay within 14 days.
The solicitor’s financial exposure may not end there. He is facing a further detailed assessment of Master James’s own costs bill arising from the same case. At a preliminary hearing on 15 July 2025 at Blackpool County Court, both parties were represented by silks and juniors — with Fiona Horlick KC acting for Makin and Daniel Saoul KC for James.
On 24 July, District Judge Woosnam directed that the detailed assessment of James’s costs will take place in Fleetwood between 15 and 18 December 2025. The judge also confirmed that there is a valid retainer between the Government Legal Department (GLD) and Master James, meaning the hourly rates charged are not restricted to the GLD’s internal levels.
Makin, who rose to prominence in the 1990s after representing Brady, the Moors murderer, has long been a controversial figure in legal circles. His failed GDPR action and the subsequent heavy costs order now mark a significant professional and financial blow.
The ruling underscores the risks faced by solicitors who pursue unsuccessful litigation against judicial officers, particularly where allegations are found to lack substance and appear aimed at reputational harm.
For Makin, the December hearing could yet deepen his financial liability. For the wider legal profession, the case serves as a warning about the severe consequences of ill-founded challenges under data protection law.