header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
20 November 2008
Issue: 7346 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Very beaky

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Civil Way

Family advocates should be ready to spend more time in the magistrates’ courts. The ethos behind the Allocation and Transfer of Proceedings Order 2008 (SI 2008/2836) which substantially comes into force on 25 November 2008, and the complementary President’s Practice Direction (PD) issued on 3 November 2008 is to push more private law family work under the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) and Pt IV of the Family Law Act 1996 (FLA 1996) down to magistrates and hope that they keep it. The aim is have a quarter of these cases heard by the beaks. The Children (Allocation of Proceedings) Order 1991 (SI 1991/1677) and the Family Law Act 1996 (Part IV) (Allocation of Proceedings) Order 1997 (SI 1997/1896), with their amendments, and the Children (Allocation of Proceedings) (Appeals) Order 1991 (SI 1991/180) are repealed in their entirety. So:

Among those proceedings that must now be started in a magistrates’ court are for parental responsibility by father or step-parent unless a ChA 1989, s 8 application is made at the same time or the child is

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
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
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
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
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
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
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
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
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll