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

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll