header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
07 April 2011 / David Burrows
Issue: 7460 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Under new rule (2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

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

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
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
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
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
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
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
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll