header-logo header-logo

10 February 2017
Issue: 7733 / Categories: Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 10 February 2017

More paper for non-moles; destroying a buffet; & Court of Appeal fix

PG FOR NON-MOLES

The President’s 13 October 2014 practice guidance on the duration of ex parte orders but with non-molestation orders being its focus has been replaced by more workable guidance issued by him on 18 January 2017 (see www.judiciary.gov.uk ) which practitioners should heed when drafting. Gone is the idea that the expiration of the ex parte order should coincide with the return date (say six hours apart) because this potentially exposed the non-molestation applicant to harm if the respondent failed to appear on the return date and could not be served with the new order or acquainted with its terms before expiry of the ex parte. Also ditched is the suggestion that the respondent be directed to notify the court within a specified period whether they intended to turn up to oppose the continuation of the order and that, in default, the court might deal with the return hearing on paper.

So now:

  • The ex parte must have a fixed
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

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Burgess Mee—Victoria Sterritt

Family law boutique expands London team with legal director hire

Ward Hadaway—Mike Gore

Ward Hadaway—Mike Gore

Firm enhances advisory capability with strategic risk specialist hire

Stewarts—Alexandra Lyons

Stewarts—Alexandra Lyons

Insurance and reinsurance specialist joins policyholder disputes practice as partner

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
The fallout from Lord Mandelson’s appointment and dismissal as UK ambassador to Washington raises profound questions about constitutional governance, accountability and political appointments
Pastries may be in the firing line while kebabs escape scrutiny, but the reality is far more nuanced
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
back-to-top-scroll