header-logo header-logo

Judicial line: 12 September 2019

12 September 2019
Issue: 7855 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Judicial line
printer mail-detail
This week: respondent’s unknown address; CSA chargeback; venue for set aside; upping costs; summary judgment omission; right of audience.

GONE MISSING

Q Is the court empowered to make an order for disclosure of the proposed respondent’s address against a government department before the institution of family proceedings?

A ‘Requests’ to government departments (other than HMRC which requires an order of the High Court to be made) for disclosure of an address, are covered by FPR PD6C and presuppose that there are existing proceedings or at least proceedings being issued at the same time. FPR Part 21 does allow for disclosure by a non-party, but only where there are proceedings. There is no procedure for applications for disclosure to be made before issue, unless on an undertaking to issue. The Family Law Act 1986 s 33 can be used where the address might be held institutionally by, say, a local authority or school and while that is only to disclose a child’s whereabouts, invariably that leads to the proposed respondent.

The CSA conundrum

Q Your

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll