header-logo header-logo

29 April 2010 / Rosie Schumm
Issue: 7415 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Nipping it in the bud

Will the Revised PLP remedy some of the problems of the family law system? Rosie Schumm reports

When Sir Mark Potter, President of the Family Division, set out his Framework for a Family Court in December 2006, he had the long term aim of poviding a consistent and unified national approach in the family courts. One of the key elements of his framework was the plan for the introduction of a new practice direction with regard to the case management of private law children matters.

He also had to address the immediate problem affecting the family justice system, namely, the effect of the mounting pressures and backlogs faced by Cafcass (specifically, in the appointment of guardians and the production of court reports) set against the backdrop of a shortfall in funding.

On 1 April 2010, the long awaited Revised Private Law Programme Practice Direction (PLP) came into effect (courts will have until 4 October 2010 to effect its full implementation).

The revised PLP builds on the success achieved by the combined roles

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

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Ogier—Martin Livingston

Martin Livingston joins Ogier in Cayman to strengthen regulatory support

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan—47 promotions

Blake Morgan announces 47 summer promotions across UK offices

NEWS
Consultant-led law firms should prepare for closer regulatory attention as oversight evolves
Artificial intelligence may draft workplace grievances, but employers cannot treat them any differently from conventional complaints
From dishonest claimants to judicial promotions and procedural skirmishes, the latest legal developments offer plenty for litigators to digest
Fresh guidance is set to influence how courts decide whether hearings take place online or in person
County Court judges remain divided over whether landlords can lawfully force entry to carry out essential safety inspections after tenants ignore access injunctions
back-to-top-scroll