Search Results for: family procedure rules

Practice Directions to the New Family Procedure Rules 2010 – Mediation PD

I posted recently about the Practice Directions to the new Family Procedure Rules which come into force on 6 April. Practice Direction 3A Pre-Application Protocol for Mediation Information and Assessment has now been published along with a guidance note and Compliance Form FM1.

It provides that parties to private family proceedings must prior to issue have explored whether mediation might be an alternative method by which to resolve their dispute by attending a mediation information and assessment meeting. If they have not done this the court is likely on first hearing to adjourn pending attendance at such a meeting which constitutes non-compliance with the Protocol. Continue Reading…

PRACTICE DIRECTIONS TO THE FAMILY PROCEDURE RULES 2010 – THE ABRIDGED VERSION

Ask and ye shall receive. And lo! I have receivethed no less than 27 Practice Directions to supplement the Family Procedure Rules 2010, all smiling at me from my inbox this morning, and all apparently all made by the President and approved on behalf of the Lord (Chancellor) Himself. My cup truly runneth over. There remains at least one outstanding, but you can’t have everything you wish for. Blessed as I am with these bountiful gifts it is only fitting that I should give of myself and so, once again yours truly has waded through reams of information to produce some kind of distillation. Thanks be to Pink Tape. And here endeth the cheap religious mockery.

I’m going to take them in order of interest. This is a wildly reckless editorial decision I know, but necessary if I am to preserve my sanity. And it’s Friday and this is what I consider fun (it will be Monday by the time you read this. No one will thank me if I deliver them this gift on a weekend).

Let us begin at the back with the PD that deals with Transitional Arrangements (PD36A). Because the first thing you want to know is just how soon is all this really going to kick in?

PD 36A TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

The general intention is to apply the FPR to existing proceedings as far as practicable, and the old rules only where it is not.

When an initiating step has been taken before 6 April 2011 it will proceed under the previous rules and any step that must be taken in response must be in accordance with those rules. However, where a new step is taken in any existing proceedings on or after 6 April it must be done under the new rules.

The overriding objective applies in any event to all cases from 6 April onwards.

Only application forms under the FPR will be issued on or after 6 April – old forms will be returned unissued, except in exceptional cases where the matter is urgent. This begs the question of what the new forms are – of which more below.

When a matter first comes before the court (including on paper) after 6 April the court may direct how the FPR apply, although there is a general presumption that the FPR will apply.

If an application is issued prior to 6 April but listed after that date the presumption is that the application will be decided having regard to the FPR.

And where the first occasion on which existing proceedings are before a court after 6 April is a hearing of a substantive issue the general presumption is that the hearing will be conducted according to the FPR.

An assessment of costs taking place after 6 April will be in accordance with FPR Part 28, but the presumption is that no costs for work undertaken prior to 6 April will be disallowed if they would have been allowed if assessed prior to that date. The question of whether to allow costs for work undertaken on or after 6 April will generally be taken in accordance with the FPR.

Easy. The answer to the first question is: pretty much it will kick in on 6 April, so you’d better be ready.

Continue Reading…

Family Procedure Rules 2010 – The Very Abridged Version

The Family Procedure Rules 2010 – not to be confused with the Family ProceedINGS Rules 1991 (as amended) – are now available for your delectation. I don’t know many lawyers who would relish the prospect of poring over almost 300 pages of SI, so I’ve done it for you. Not entirely selfless, as it’s a task I had to perform for other reasons (I take the view that it wouldn’t do to write a book about Family Courts without understanding the rules), but regardless of that you may send your thanks, congratulations, contributions or insults my way any time.

The new FPR are hailed as a single consolidated set of rules, in contrast to the mishmash of FPR, FP(CA)R and SCR, CCR, CPR that preceded. However the new rules do appear from first reading to rely rather more heavily on Practice Directions for the essentials than has hitherto been the case. Since those PDs have not yet been made available there are some parts of the picture that unfolds below which remain a little blurry. This then is a first sketch, the detail will have to be in-filled later when the PDs are available and when I’ve recovered from the tedium that is part and parcel of a comparison between old and new rules.

I have not summarized every element of the new rules. Many large chunks of the rules are in fact the same rules in more logical order or expressed in less lawyerly style (although I still don’t think the rules will win any Plain English Crystals (mind you I note with only one raised eyebrow that listed as holders of a Crystal are the ‘Legal Services Board’ (sic) and the Child Support Agency – perhaps crystals are not so hard to come by). I have focused (as you may imagine) on those aspects of the rules which represent a departure from the old, but what has struck me about this exercise is how much material I thought at first scan was new, but in fact was already in the rules. (I make this confession with some confidence that it is not just me to whom this will apply – I know none of you know these rules inside out either – that’s what we pay £300 for the Family Court Practice for!) I had assumed for example that, based on the length of the section concerning the representation of children, there was much new material on this topic. In fact the vast bulk of it is already in the rules, rules we have all probably read at some point but which we scarcely ever refer back to. There are many dusty corners of the FPR which many practitioners will not have had cause to peer into regularly – this is an opportunity to (re)familiarize yourself with those aspects of the rules observed mainly in their breach or which are well known as to content but not as to source (who can tell me the rule number which bars the filling of evidence in section 8 applications except by specific direction of the court?). There are more than one of the rules which had me muttering “good idea – why wasn’t that in the rules before? Oh – it was. Guess we just ignored it”.

So, here is my first run at the mini-FPR 2010. Whatever else it may be it’s a damn sight shorter than the full version. Please let me know if there are any errors or idiocies by posting a comment below.

Continue Reading…