header-logo header-logo

08 October 2021 / David Burrows
Issue: 7951 / Categories: Features , Family , Divorce
printer mail-detail

Reflections on the Burrows amendment…

60014
David Burrows charts the highs & lows of the ‘Ancillary relief pilot scheme’ 25 years on
  • Looks at the main aspects of the financial relief procedural scheme and how it has fared since its introduction.
  • A well-run financial dispute resolution, overseen by an experienced district judge, can work. Massive amounts of much-needed court time, and the parties’ resources, could be saved.

‘We call it “the Burrows amendment”’, said the Lord Chancellor, Lord McKay, as we sat at a roundtable—him, six civil servants from the Lord Chancellor’s Department (now Ministry of Justice) and me. It was late November 1996. The ‘amendment’ was Civil Procedure Act 1997, Sch 1, para 7, which says the following:

‘Different provision for different cases etc.

7. The power to make Civil Procedure Rules includes power to make different provision for different cases or different areas, including different provision—

(a) for a specific court or specific division of a court, or

(b) for specific proceedings, or a specific jurisdiction,

specified in the rules.’

The Lord Chancellor

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll