header-logo header-logo

11 March 2020 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 7878 / Categories: Procedure & practice , Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 13 March 2020

Family Rules, OK! 
 

 

Family fare: first course

 

There’s impacting stuff for sneaks, the costs reckless and family practitioners (not mutually exclusive) out of the Family Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2020 (SI 2020/135). None, however, are likely to be too exercised by the end, not literally, of justices’ clerks and assistant justices’ clerks who join the mob of the all-powerful justices’ legal advisers.

As from 6 April 2020, the same scheme for communications with the court as has been applied by the CPR (see 169 NLJ 7833, p13) is lifted and extended to family proceedings. If the communication contains any representation on a matter of substance or procedure, it must be copied to the other party or their representatives and state on its face that this is being done. Unless otherwise directed, a non-compliant communication will be returned without being considered by the court and with a brief explanation. Subject to hearing from the parties, the court may also impose sanctions or exercise other case management powers. The exemptions?

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

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
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
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll