header-logo header-logo

04 April 2023
Issue: 8020 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Child law , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Record delays in family cases

Private family law children cases took an average of 47 weeks to conclude in the final quarter of 2022—up five weeks on the same period in 2021 and an all-time high, according to the latest family court statistics.

Law Society president Lubna Shuja branded the delays, affecting custody and residence cases involving nearly 19,000 children during the quarter, ‘unacceptable’. Disposal times have been growing worse since 2016, when cases took about 22 weeks on average.

Shuja said: ‘HM Courts & Tribunals Service has previously estimated that it may take three years to return to pre-pandemic levels, which is very worrying, particularly for cases that concern children and family matters. 

‘These delays are preventing parents from being able to see their children and could mean children are left without the stability they need to thrive. The UK government must ensure, so far as possible, that there are sufficient fee-paid and full-time judges to deal with existing and new caseloads.’

The Ministry of Justice figures also show the level of legal representation in the family court, ten years after LASPO (the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012) came into force in April 2013, removing legal aid from most private family cases.

Both sides were unrepresented in 40% of cases in the quarter up to December 2022, up from 17% in January to March 2013. Correspondingly, both sides had legal representation in 18% of cases in the final quarter of 2022, compared to 41% in the first quarter of 2013.

Shuja said: ‘Litigants in person require more time and support from the court, which is likely to slow down the system and increase overall costs. 

‘Early legal advice must be reinstated so families can be supported in the court system. This would also make a cost-effective contribution to resolving the backlogs in the family courts.’

Issue: 8020 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Child law , Procedure & practice
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