header-logo header-logo

04 September 2008
Issue: 7335 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Family
printer mail-detail

Family law

Re N (a Child) (McKenzie Friends: Rights of Audience) [2008] EWHC 2042 (Fam), [2008] All ER (D) 116 (Aug)

A “McKenzie friend” does not, as such, have a right of audience; the court can exercise its discretion to grant a McKenzie friend a right of audience, in accordance with s 27(2)(c) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (CLSA 1990), “only … for good reason” and bearing in mind the “general objective” set out in s 17(1) of CLSA 1990 and the “general principle” set out in s 17(3).

The court should be very slow to grant a McKenzie friend a right of audience. But that is not to say that such an order can be made only in exceptional circumstances (save that, in the case of a “professional” McKenzie friend who acts also as an advocate, setting himself up as an unqualified advocate providing advocacy services, whether for reward or not, the court will make an order only in exceptional circumstances).

The court must remember that the overriding objective is that the courts should do justice and that legal aid is not available as readily as it was in the past. Moreover, the grant of rights of audience to a McKenzie friend may be of advantage to the court in ensuring the litigant in person receives a fair hearing.

Issue: 7335 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Family
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
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