header-logo header-logo

Calls for shake-up of family justice system

07 April 2011
Issue: 7460 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Children can wait “well over a year” for the family justice system to determine their future, an independent review panel has found.

An interim report by the Family Justice Review Panel found that too many private law disputes are ending up in court, that caseloads are rising and that there is little joint planning between the different organisations.

The panel’s chair, David Norgrove said, in his introduction: “There is distrust, with now a vicious circle of layers of checking and scrutiny that lead to work being done less well in the first place.There are few means of mutual learning and feedback. The lack of IT and management information is astonishing.”

The panel’s interim recommendations were to set up a Family Justice Service headed by a national Family Justice Board that would draw the function of agencies together, while local Family Justice Boards replaced the existing “plethora of arrangements”. It called for specialist judges to hear cases from start to finish, and for court social work services to form part of the Family Justice Service, subsuming the role of Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service.

It recommended less reliance on unnecessary expert reports when these are not in the best interests of the child; that a bespoke timetable be established for each child’s situation to minimise the damage caused by uncertainty; and that separating couples with children be assessed for mediation and given information on the impact of conflict on the children.
It also recommended that parenting agreements be drafted to set out contact arrangements for grandparents.

Stuart Ruff, solicitor at Thomas Eggar, said: “Grandparents are often forgotten in any separation and a huge number of grandparents lose contact with their grandchildren.”

Issue: 7460 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
back-to-top-scroll