header-logo header-logo

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

A work in progress

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll