header-logo header-logo

13 October 2021
Issue: 7952 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Divorce
printer mail-detail

Reforming child arrangement cases

The President of the Family Division has vowed to reform the system for dealing with child arrangement cases within the next three years

Speaking at the Jersey International Family Law Conference last week, Sir Andrew McFarlane, who is due to retire in three years, said courts were the wrong place for deciding child arrangement disputes between separating couples where there were no allegations of abuse or safeguarding issues. He highlighted a 2020 report by the Family Solutions Group, chaired by Helen Adams, entitled ‘What about me?’, which he aimed to use ‘as the blueprint for radical change and to do all that I can to press for its recommendations to be implemented’.

The report identified gaps in provision for separating parents and potential reforms. However, it does not propose any change in legislation and its recommendations are ‘essentially about communication’, Sir Andrew said. It recommends a shift in language away from that of legal disputes and towards that of supporting parents to resolve issues together. It calls for parents to attend ‘information assessment meetings’ at an early stage of their separation, at a ‘family hub’ or other non-court resource, where a family professional would conduct an early assessment and triage the family’s needs. 

Sir Andrew said: ‘Cases of straight forward relationship disfunction, not involving abuse or a need for protection, should not need to come before a magistrate or judge for resolution.

‘Indeed, because, for this group of cases, the issues concern matters of emotion and psychology, a court is most unlikely to be the best place to achieve any lasting resolution… the court process is not one that either adds value to the welfare of the child or is in any way beneficial for the parents. In some cases, it may simply provide a pitch and a referee for them to play out further rounds in their adult contest.’

Issue: 7952 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Divorce
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ling Ong, London Market FOIL

NLJ Career Profile: Ling Ong, London Market FOIL

Ling Ong, partner at Weightmans and president of London Market FOIL, discusses her biggest inspirations, the challenges of AI and the importance of tackling unconscious bias

DWF—Imogen Francis

DWF—Imogen Francis

Director and head of IP team joins in Birmingham

Penningtons Manches Cooper—five promotions

Penningtons Manches Cooper—five promotions

Firm boosts partnership and costs practice with five senior promotions

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll