header-logo header-logo

Time to nip paid McKenzie Friends in court in the bud?

16 June 2017
Issue: 7750 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Paid McKenzie Friends in family law cases vary from ‘business opportunists’ through ‘good Samaritans’ to ‘family justice crusaders’ and ‘rogues’.

Research, commissioned by the Bar Council and carried out by the Universities of Cardiff and Bristol, found evidence of McKenzie Friends ‘whose active efforts to exercise rights of audience presented difficulties’, although others referred clients on to specialists where appropriate. It concluded that ‘there is enough that is concerning in relation to fee-charging McKenzie Friends to merit efforts to tackle the worst of the sector’.

About 100 fee-charging McKenzie Friends are operating in England and Wales. However, it is impossible to gauge the exact number. Moreover, the bulk of work is delivered outside the courtroom, with few McKenzie Friends seeking to represent their litigant in person clients in court.

Chairman of the Bar, Andrew Langdon QC, said: ‘It is particularly interesting that the courtroom—where the very concept of McKenzie Friends as ‘quiet supporters’ for a litigant was born—is not primarily where those who pay them are receiving their services today. In that sense, what we see in court represents the tip of the iceberg. The risks of McKenzie Friends being able to seek payment for representing their clients in court, despite being unqualified and offering no disciplinary process and no requirement to have insurance, are considerable and so vulnerable clients have little protection.

The research suggests that the number of paid McKenzie Friends seeking judges’ permission to represent clients in court at present is smaller than many feared, and one view is that it can and should be nipped in the bud without impacting on access to justice.’

Issue: 7750 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll