header-logo header-logo

Judicial line: 12 September 2019

12 September 2019
Issue: 7855 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Judicial line
printer mail-detail
This week: respondent’s unknown address; CSA chargeback; venue for set aside; upping costs; summary judgment omission; right of audience.

GONE MISSING

Q Is the court empowered to make an order for disclosure of the proposed respondent’s address against a government department before the institution of family proceedings?

A ‘Requests’ to government departments (other than HMRC which requires an order of the High Court to be made) for disclosure of an address, are covered by FPR PD6C and presuppose that there are existing proceedings or at least proceedings being issued at the same time. FPR Part 21 does allow for disclosure by a non-party, but only where there are proceedings. There is no procedure for applications for disclosure to be made before issue, unless on an undertaking to issue. The Family Law Act 1986 s 33 can be used where the address might be held institutionally by, say, a local authority or school and while that is only to disclose a child’s whereabouts, invariably that leads to the proposed respondent.

The CSA conundrum

Q Your

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll