header-logo header-logo

23 June 2011 / Geraldine Morris
Issue: 7471 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Under new rule (6)

Geraldine Morris considers whether the options for financial relief in family proceedings are on the right track

Practitioners are likely by now to have started to experience the changes introduced by the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010). In relation to financial orders (ancillary relief as was) the majority of the relevant procedural provisions can be found in FPR 2010, Pt 9 and the linked practice direction (PD) 9A. However, a feature of the new rules is that no application to the court, whether financial or children related, can be looked at in isolation. The overarching principles either introduced or cemented by the rules will impact on financial orders as much as any other. Key provisions to take into account are:

 

  • Terminology—the glossary to the FPR 2010 isn’t particularly enlightening (most practitioners will surely know the meaning of “affidavit”) but it is clear from the rules themselves that an attempt has been made to modernise the terminology which in the case of financial proceedings is marked by a shift from the slightly antiquated
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

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys senior leadership appointments

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths strengthens London Construction and Engineering practice with two strategic senior hires

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins announces strategic hire to deepen skills base in the social business sector

NEWS
Existing defamation law can respond to AI ‘hallucinations’, but allocating responsibility will prove harder where outputs reach users without human intervention
The High Court has upheld a rare successful serious-irregularity challenge after an arbitrator relied on an implied term neither party had advanced
Thirty years after The Future of Law shook a profession still using fax machines, its central forecast looks increasingly less like prophecy and more like description
Part-time status need only be an effective cause of less favourable treatment, rather than the sole cause, the Supreme Court has held in Augustine v Data Cars
Britain’s new acknowledgement that Israel’s occupation is unlawful, and accompanying settlement-goods ban and sanctions, is significant but overdue, argue Danny Friedman KC and Victor Kattan in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll