header-logo header-logo

25 January 2007 / Dorothea Gartland
Issue: 7257 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Calderdale lessons

Dorothea Gartland reports on the courts’ attitude to section 38 assessment funding

The issue of funding assessments proposed under the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989), s 38(6) continues to cause difficulties for practitioners and the courts. Sheffield City Council v V (Legal Services Commission intervening) [2006] EWHC 1861 (Fam), [2006] Fam Law 833 is therefore particularly helpful to practitioners.

In Sheffield City Council the local authority successfully appealed the decision of the Family Proceedings Court which directed it to pay all the costs of a residential assessment. Instead the court directed that the costs of the assessment should be shared on a proportionate basis between the parties applying the Calderdale considerations (see Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council v S [2004] EWHC 2529 (Fam), [2004] All ER (D) 346 (Nov)).
 

Funding considerations

As practitioners will know, in Lambeth London Borough Council v S [2005] EWHC 776 (Fam), [2005] All ER (D) 341 (May) the court stated that the considerations identified by the court in Calderdale concerning the funding of a jointly-instructed expert report could equally

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll