header-logo header-logo

03 February 2017 / David Burrows
Issue: 7733 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

In the cross-fire

Where now for domestic violence in family proceedings, asks David Burrows

  • How can the law be reformed fairly to protect those involved in family proceedings who have been subject to domestic violence while at the same time ensuring a fair trial?

​On 20 January 2017 The Guardian reported that: “Senior judges are taking steps to end the presumption that a father must have contact with a child where there is evidence of domestic abuse that would put the child or mother at risk.” Cobb J (Family Division) had said that the presumption in the family court that there should be “contact at all costs” with both parents must go where a parent’s involvement might place the child or other parent at risk.

On the same day Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division, published his 16th View from the President’s Chambers Children and vulnerable witnesses—where are we? and Cobb J’s report (dated 18 November 2016), to which is annexed a proposed family proceedings practice direction (PD12J: Child arrangements & contact order:

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll