header-logo header-logo

23 May 2013
Issue: 7561 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

New family standards set

MoJ aim to ensure quality of expert evidence in family cases

Child care experts giving evidence in family courts will have to comply with new national standards, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has announced.

The MoJ said the move would reverse the “increasing trend” for experts to provide “unnecessary and costly evidence” in the form of further written statements, clarifications and additional court appearances, which can delay child care cases.

Under the standards, only “qualified, experienced and recognised professionals” will be allowed to give evidence.

Family justice minister, Lord McNally says: “Poor quality expert evidence can lead to unacceptable delays for children and their families. By putting standards in place we will ensure only the highest calibre of evidence is permitted in family proceedings.”

A nine-week consultation, due to close on 18 July, has been jointly launched by the Family Justice Council and the MoJ. It follows Sir David Norgrove’s review of family justice, which found some poor quality expert evidence being put forward.

Dr Heather Payne, chair of the Family Justice Council’s Experts Working Group, which drafted the standards says: “The standards are designed to improve the quality, supply and use of expertise to improve outcomes for children in the family courts.”

According to the MoJ, the average time for care cases to be concluded has already been reduced from 56 weeks to 45 weeks. It aims to bring the tie down to 26 weeks. £52m in legal aid was spent on expert reports in child care cases in the 12 months up to October 2011.

Issue: 7561 / Categories: Legal News
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