header-logo header-logo

07 April 2011 / David Burrows
Issue: 7460 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Under new rule (2)

FPR: David Burrows puts case management principles in the spotlight

The concept of an overriding objective is well-known to those using the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR 1998). The Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), which came into operation on 6 April 2011, reproduces the CPR overriding objective with one amendment.

The overriding objective is not a rule in the sense that it does not require anyone to do or not to do anything. It is an exhortation to the court and to the parties to proceed by a set of principles which should govern the exercise of the court’s powers and any discretion under the rules, and the court’s interpretation of the rules (FPR 2010 r 1.2). The parties have a balancing duty to the court (FPR 2010 r 1.3), “to help the court to further the overriding objective”. This is the essence of case management.

Case management is the procedural means whereby applications are moved on to trial by judges and the court administration. So far as possible, this should

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll