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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll