header-logo header-logo

An unfair discretion?

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

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 below

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

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll