header-logo header-logo

07 August 2025
Categories: Legal News , Family , Diversity , Equality , Training & education
printer mail-detail

Neurodiversity essay wins Professor Jo Delahunty KC Essay Competition

Inner Temple Scholar Monique Simone Fremder has been announced as the winner of the 2025 Professor Jo Delahunty KC Essay Competition, part of the Bridging the Bar Academy programme

Fremder's essay explores whether the UK’s legal framework and practice guidance adequately support neurodivergent individuals in family justice proceedings. She highlights the strengths of existing laws, such as the Family Procedure Rules 2010 and Practice Direction 3AA, which mandate early identification and tailored adjustments to ensure meaningful participation. She also praises the Family Justice Council’s guidance for promoting a strengths-based approach.

However, the essay identifies persistent challenges in implementation, including inconsistent practice and limited training among legal professionals. Fremder calls for reforms such as mandatory training, improved communication tools, and stronger collaboration across services.

Her winning entry underscores the importance of recognising neurodiversity as a valued aspect of human variation and ensuring equal access to justice for all.

The Professor Jo Delahunty KC Essay Competition focuses on neurodiversity, with essays limited to a maximum of 1,000 words. Professor Jo Delahunty KC, of 4PB, acts as sole judge and funds the prize of £500 to the author of the winning essay.

Read the essay in full here.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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