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

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime specialist joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
Could an online LLM in Commercial and Technology Law expand your career options?
The controversial Courts and Tribunals Bill has passed its second reading by 304 votes to 203, despite concerted opposition from the legal profession
The presumption of parental involvement is to be abolished, the Lord Chancellor David Lammy has confirmed
A highly experienced chartered legal executive has been prevented from representing her client in financial remedies proceedings, in a case that highlights the continued fallout from Mazur
Plans to commandeer 50%-75% of the interest on lawyers’ client accounts to fund the justice system overlook the cost and administrative burden of this on small and medium law firms, CILEX has warned
back-to-top-scroll