header-logo header-logo

19 April 2024 / David Burrows
Issue: 8067 / Categories: Features , In Court , Family , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Family law & the judicial line of influence

168631
David Burrows pays tribute to the enduring work of a legion of influential family judges
  • Covers seminal judgments by family court judges, including Lord Scarman, Lord Nicholls and Lady Hale.

What influence have individual judges had on the development and practice of family law over the past 30 or 40 years? Through those years the shadow—mostly benign—of the Children Act 1989 (CA 1989) has been long. So too has the Human Rights Act 1998 and all must be seen through the procedural prism of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR 1998) and its pale imitation, the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010). But how has the common law progressed?

Development of the common law by presidents of the Family Division has been slight. It is hampered by the varied roles assigned to individual presidents. None have made a real mark on the law, even Munby P for all his administrative schemes and passion for ‘transparency’. The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 defined separation of powers principles

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll