header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 June 2016 / David Burrows
Issue: 7703 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Child benefit

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7703_burrows

When does the common law listen to the child, asks David Burrows

  • Can children’s evidence in family proceedings be dealt with in a way analogous with such evidence in criminal proceedings?

  • Are special measures for child evidence available in children proceedings?

  • How does the law balance fairness to alleged abusers with the welfare of child witnesses?

In Richardson v Richardson [2011] EWCA Civ 79, [2011] All ER (D) 86 (Feb) Lord Justice Munby (now Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division) reminded everyone (at para [53]) that “the Family Division is part of the High Court. It is not some legal Alsatia where the common law and equity do not apply. The rules of agency [in that particular case] apply there as much as elsewhere….” And so it is, surely, with the application of rules about children’s evidence?

This article asks: do common law rules apply in family proceedings in the same way as they do, for example, for children’s evidence in criminal proceedings? And, if so, does a family

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll