header-logo header-logo

06 March 2008
Issue: 7311 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Legal services , Family
printer mail-detail

2,500% fees hike could put children at risk

News

Vulnerable children could be exposed to serious risk by government plans to hike court fees for care proceedings, family law experts warn. The government proposes raising the fees for care proceedings by 2,500%, from £150 to £4,000, in its December consultation, Public Law Family Fees. Local authorities will be allocated an extra £40m to account for this.

However, the funding will not be ring-fenced. The NSPCC and the Law Society say this means financial considerations could deter local authorities from issuing care proceedings in favour of lower-cost strategies where the child is not represented. This could involve giving parents a second chance in cases of neglect, or encouraging them to agree to the child being voluntarily accommodated temporarily instead of issuing proceedings.

Andrew Holroyd, president of the Law Society, expresses his concern: “This rise could effectively price children involved in care disputes out of court, and deny them the right to justice they need.

“Rather than court proceedings being issued, it is likely that compromises will be reached that are influenced more by financial considerations than what is best for these vulnerable children, leaving them at risk and without a voice.” He says the interests of children are in danger of being made a secondary factor under these plans when they should be central. “The Law Society will be working with the NSPCC to ensure that these concerns are expressed in the consultation process,” he says. NSPCC director and chief executive Dame Mary Marsh comments: “There is a real and serious risk that vulnerable children and their families will be prevented from having full access to justice if these proposals are implemented because some decisions about taking proceedings in relation to vulnerable children could be finance led.”

The Public Law Family Fees consultation period continues until 11 March.

Issue: 7311 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Legal services , Family
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