header-logo header-logo

04 September 2008
Issue: 7335 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Family
printer mail-detail

Family law

Re N (a Child) (McKenzie Friends: Rights of Audience) [2008] EWHC 2042 (Fam), [2008] All ER (D) 116 (Aug)

A “McKenzie friend” does not, as such, have a right of audience; the court can exercise its discretion to grant a McKenzie friend a right of audience, in accordance with s 27(2)(c) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (CLSA 1990), “only … for good reason” and bearing in mind the “general objective” set out in s 17(1) of CLSA 1990 and the “general principle” set out in s 17(3).

The court should be very slow to grant a McKenzie friend a right of audience. But that is not to say that such an order can be made only in exceptional circumstances (save that, in the case of a “professional” McKenzie friend who acts also as an advocate, setting himself up as an unqualified advocate providing advocacy services, whether for reward or not, the court will make an order only in exceptional circumstances).

The court must remember that the overriding objective is that the courts should do justice and that legal aid is not available as readily as it was in the past. Moreover, the grant of rights of audience to a McKenzie friend may be of advantage to the court in ensuring the litigant in person receives a fair hearing.

Issue: 7335 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

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