header-logo header-logo

01 February 2013 / David Burrows
Issue: 7546 / Categories: Opinion , Family
printer mail-detail

Under attack

David Burrows warns of an assault on family law

As Ryder J contemplates reform of the family justice system, he may wish to be aware of the assault by the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court upon some of the more cherished assumptions of family lawyers. Family lawyers should perhaps look to the legitimacy of some of their long-held shibboleths before another Court of Appeal assault. For example, “review” hearings in children cases; restrictions in the rules on disclosure in financial remedy proceedings; and costs limitations in financial remedy proceedings: no statutory powers exist for any of these. To ignore the law, as the cases below show, can be repressive and is certainly illegal.

The beginning

Re B (Children) [2008] UKHL 35, [2008] 4 All ER 1 started the process. Lord Hoffmann patiently explained the principles of proof of facts in issue: till a fact in issue is proved then it is treated as not having happened (Lord Hoffmann’s binary system of evidence). This is the language of the adversarial process which

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

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

Financial services and regulatory offering boosted by partner hires

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll