header-logo header-logo

29 September 2021
Issue: 7950 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Divorce , Covid-19
printer mail-detail

Cancelled hearings costing ex-couples dear

Last-minute cancellations of court hearings to agree financial settlements or child contact arrangements are leaving ex-couples facing ‘ruinous costs’, family lawyers have warned

Osbornes Law’s family lawyers say they are seeing increasing numbers of clients whose final hearings are removed from court listings with days to spare, leaving them to pay thousands of pounds in costs. The cancellations are due to a shortage of judges and the backlogs in the family courts. However, the couples affected can expect to wait at least six months for a new listing, leaving them in limbo.

Claire Andrews, family lawyer at Osbornes Law, said: ‘Going through the divorce courts is already a very stressful experience―most are acrimonious couples who have already exhausted all other options.

‘Gearing up for a final court hearing takes months of preparation and barristers must be briefed and paid for their work, often two weeks in advance. While postponements used to be relatively common for lower-level hearings, we are now seeing more and more final hearings cancelled with just one or two days to spare. This runs up huge costs for clients who are still no closer to resolving their disputes.

‘This can be particularly tough for those who are pursuing a higher earning ex for a financial settlement but have small means themselves. I have seen some clients concerned they will run out of money but have little choice but to continue.’

While it is possible to recover some money from HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) in these circumstances, the process is complex and requires an application be made with a detailed breakdown of costs. Moreover, if the court finds every effort was made to source a judge then reimbursement of any costs is unlikely, as HMCTS will state ‘judicial availability is not in the hands of the court administration office’.

Some hearings are categorised as ‘at risk’ which means they can’t be guaranteed, removing any possibility of HMCTS reimbursing costs.

Issue: 7950 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Divorce , Covid-19
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll