header-logo header-logo

22 September 2011
Issue: 7482 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Matrimonial reply missing

I cannot find any provision in the Family Procedure Rules 2010 for the filing of a reply to a petition for a matrimonial order...

I cannot find any provision in the Family Procedure Rules 2010 for the filing of a reply to a petition for a matrimonial order. Has the reply been axed? Is there no power to allow one?

The 2010 Rules do not make specific provision for a reply to an answer in matrimonial or civil partnership proceedings. Where an answer has been filed, either party may apply under r 7.19 for a decree nisi/conditional order to be considered. The case will then be listed for a case management conference under r 7.20(4) and the court will give directions in accordance with r 7.22. If any response to an answer is required, the extent and form of this can be considered at the conference.

The court may direct a formal reply, but more usually would simply direct the filing of evidence. If further information is required about either parties’ case, a direction can

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