header-logo header-logo

26 May 2023 / Clare Williams
Issue: 8026 / Categories: Features , Family , Divorce
printer mail-detail

Families at war: showing some restraint

123336
Clare Williams provides a practical guide to the court’s options for civil restraint orders in family practice
  • Rarely used in family law, civil restraint orders (CROs) require a party to obtain the permission of the court before making particular applications or claims.
  • The three types of CRO (limited, extended and general) represent a scale of increasing severity.

The civil restraint order (CRO) is seldom encountered in family practice. Reported examples frequently share features such as extreme acrimony and a tortuous procedural history; occasionally, CROs are made following years-long vendettas against the legal system. Difficult cases are nothing strange to the family lawyer, but it is important for practitioners to be aware of when and how the court can exercise one of its most extreme powers of case management.

What is a CRO?

CROs require a party to obtain the permission of the court before making particular applications or claims. They function as a filtering mechanism rather than an outright ban. The leading (civil) case is Bhamjee v Forsdick

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

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