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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll