header-logo header-logo

11 March 2020 / Stephen Gold
Issue: 7878 / Categories: Procedure & practice , Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 13 March 2020

Family Rules, OK! 
 

 

Family fare: first course

 

There’s impacting stuff for sneaks, the costs reckless and family practitioners (not mutually exclusive) out of the Family Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2020 (SI 2020/135). None, however, are likely to be too exercised by the end, not literally, of justices’ clerks and assistant justices’ clerks who join the mob of the all-powerful justices’ legal advisers.

As from 6 April 2020, the same scheme for communications with the court as has been applied by the CPR (see 169 NLJ 7833, p13) is lifted and extended to family proceedings. If the communication contains any representation on a matter of substance or procedure, it must be copied to the other party or their representatives and state on its face that this is being done. Unless otherwise directed, a non-compliant communication will be returned without being considered by the court and with a brief explanation. Subject to hearing from the parties, the court may also impose sanctions or exercise other case management powers. The exemptions?

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll