header-logo header-logo

04 April 2023
Issue: 8020 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Child law , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Record delays in family cases

Private family law children cases took an average of 47 weeks to conclude in the final quarter of 2022—up five weeks on the same period in 2021 and an all-time high, according to the latest family court statistics.

Law Society president Lubna Shuja branded the delays, affecting custody and residence cases involving nearly 19,000 children during the quarter, ‘unacceptable’. Disposal times have been growing worse since 2016, when cases took about 22 weeks on average.

Shuja said: ‘HM Courts & Tribunals Service has previously estimated that it may take three years to return to pre-pandemic levels, which is very worrying, particularly for cases that concern children and family matters. 

‘These delays are preventing parents from being able to see their children and could mean children are left without the stability they need to thrive. The UK government must ensure, so far as possible, that there are sufficient fee-paid and full-time judges to deal with existing and new caseloads.’

The Ministry of Justice figures also show the level of legal representation in the family court, ten years after LASPO (the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012) came into force in April 2013, removing legal aid from most private family cases.

Both sides were unrepresented in 40% of cases in the quarter up to December 2022, up from 17% in January to March 2013. Correspondingly, both sides had legal representation in 18% of cases in the final quarter of 2022, compared to 41% in the first quarter of 2013.

Shuja said: ‘Litigants in person require more time and support from the court, which is likely to slow down the system and increase overall costs. 

‘Early legal advice must be reinstated so families can be supported in the court system. This would also make a cost-effective contribution to resolving the backlogs in the family courts.’

Issue: 8020 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Child law , Procedure & practice
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll