header-logo header-logo

19 January 2024 / David Burrows
Issue: 8055 / Categories: Features , Family , In Court
printer mail-detail

Progress on open justice or administrative fiat?

153984
David Burrows raises some questions about the Family Division’s open justice pilot scheme
  • Does the President of the Family Division have administrative powers to set up an open justice pilot scheme; or should this be done by the family proceedings rule makers?
  • Can the President by administrative diktat override a financial remedy party’s anonymity, and without regard for the rights of any children affected?
  • Can the lawfulness of administrative actions be challenged judicially in the family courts proceedings in which they arise?

On 11 December 2023, the president of the Family Division issued guidance on the transparency reporting pilot for financial remedy proceedings. The pilot comes into operation on 29 January 2024. If the guidance is challenged, the pilot scheme may be found unlawful in at least two respects:

  • First, has the president power to set up a ‘pilot’ scheme at all? In this context he is an administrator, so what are his statutory powers (if any) to act in this way?
  • Second, is it lawful
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