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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll