header-logo header-logo

31 May 2012 / Dj John Doel
Issue: 7516 / Categories: Features , Public , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

A time bomb?

The clock is ticking on the debate over court attendance, says DJ John Doel

The Family Advocacy Scheme introduced by the Community Legal Service (Funding) (Amendment) Order 2011 (SI 2011/1027) has been with us since 9 May 2011. It dictates how much you will be paid for publicly-funded family labour. In particular, it sets a fixed-fee for attendance at court for an interim hearing. The duration of the hearing is calculated from the time at which it was listed to commence. Attendances of longer than one hour attract a higher rate.

Provoking a riot

Advocates are now routinely asking district judges and family magistrates to order them to attend at a time earlier than the listed time of the case in order, they say, to take instructions and prepare their client. Enforcement of such a direction may not become an issue. Any failure to observe such a direction, while not amounting to a contempt of court, would incur the wrath of the court and a judge may feel

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll