header-logo header-logo

A work in progress

28 February 2014 / David Burrows
Issue: 7596 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail
web_burrows_1

In an exclusive series David Burrows puts the new family court under scrutiny & assesses its ability to deliver justice

The 70 years since the end of World War 2 have seen the rate of family breakdown—or the liberalisation of family relationships—increase dramatically; and yet England and Wales have a court structure designed still to deal, mostly, with the trickle of divorces which the courts saw in 1859. That underlying position—a court structure derived from 1859—will not alter with the proposed new family court. That court is due to come into operation towards the end of April.

The administrative reform (seen from a Ministry of Justice perspective) is defined—some might say a little ignominiously—by Sch 10 to Crime and Courts Act 2013, which adds ss 31B–31P to the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984. No legislation (properly so called: Guidance has been issued) subsidiary to those sections has been made. That said, all is not entirely quiet on the administration front: a variety of guidance and direction has been issued and “mandatory” draft

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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll