header-logo header-logo

Cancelled hearings costing ex-couples dear

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

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll