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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll