header-logo header-logo

03 July 2009 / David Burrows
Issue: 7376 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Family , Costs , CPR
printer mail-detail

An unfair discretion?

David Burrows examines the relationship between judicial discretion & the law

Judicial discretion can be an excellent means of dealing with family disputes. It can also be a matter for confusion, and thus of litigant’s bitterness.

Anecdote is inevitable: in the last month two clients of mine have succeeded in appeals against decisions based on district judicial discretion: one on ancillary relief and one on costs. In each case the appellate judge is reviewing adversely the exercise of district judicial discretion. That done, then in each case in the exercise of their respective discretions on costs, each judge went in diametrically opposite directions. And less than a month divided the decisions.

A broad outline of both cases will follow, sufficient only to illustrate the discretion point now under review; but first a short explanation of the law on discretion-based appeals is appropriate.

Appeals: Piglowska principles

Civil Procedure Rules 1998 r 52.11(3) provides that an appeal will be allowed where the decision

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll