header-logo header-logo

14 February 2013
Issue: 7548 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Support for new child care target

Proposed 26-week target receives support of Resolution

Family lawyers’ group Resolution has expressed support for the introduction of a 26-week target for care cases, but warned the needs of children must remain paramount.

The Children and Families Bill, published last week, implements David Norgrove’s Family Justice Review recommendation for a 26-week target in child care proceedings. Judges will have discretion to extend this where necessary, as long as the case comes back to court within eight weeks.

Harjinder Kaur, the local authority representative for Resolution’s children committee, says the courts are already starting to put the 26-week deadline into practice so there will not be a sudden change overnight when it becomes law.

“The courts want to achieve a change in culture,” she says.

“Since April 2012 each case has been tracked, there is an initial hearing to determine the immediate placement for the child, and then a case-management hearing within weeks of the initial hearing, where it is recorded whether the case can meet the 26-week target and, if not, the reasons. Previously the target for completing a case was 40 weeks and cases could take a year or more.”

“A lot of delays have been caused by waiting for experts such as a psychologist or independent social worker,” she says. As of 1 February, however, experts can only be instructed where “necessary”.

Kaur says Resolution agrees that making decisions within 26 weeks will be in the interests of most children, but hopes judges will retain discretion to allow cases more time.

Local authorities will need to complete their assessments prior to court, whereas at the moment they go to court at an earlier stage, she says, which may mean cases take longer to reach court, even if they make faster progress once there.

Issue: 7548 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll