Travel expenses for defense visits to a detained client are allowed if they match the standard for a defense lawyer in the Aarhus district.

The Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's decision granting the defendant permission to travel for defense visits. The material facts show the defendant sought reimbursement for travel costs incurred while visiting a detained client, arguing these expenses should be covered. The court ruled that the expenses are valid only if they do not exceed the standard reimbursement rate applicable to a defense lawyer based in the Aarhus district.