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

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
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
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?
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
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
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll