header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
27 April 2018
Issue: 7790 / Categories: Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 27 April 2018

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

  • Speeding in Family Court OK.
  • Holidays ruined by fixed costs.
  • Landlords face bans.

FAST FAMILY FARE

4 June 2018. Stick it in the diary. And wait until then? That’s when the fast track (so beloved in the county court because most of the cases crack the day before and everyone speaks with great haste in those cases which go ahead) comes to money in the family court. The Family Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2018 (SI/2018/440) will apply to financial remedy applications issued on or after that date. Each application will be dealt with under either the fast track procedure or the standard procedure. It’s the fast track that is new and will apply in the minority of cases. The standard procedure (they don’t call it the standard track but we shall, eh?) is the appellation for the current procedure which generally applies to financial remedy cases.

The fast track will only be available to applications for spousal and civil partner periodical payments and child periodical payments (which we might see, for example,

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
Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
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?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
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
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
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
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll