header-logo header-logo

29 September 2021
Issue: 7950 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Divorce , Covid-19
printer mail-detail

Cancelled hearings costing ex-couples dear

Last-minute cancellations of court hearings to agree financial settlements or child contact arrangements are leaving ex-couples facing ‘ruinous costs’, family lawyers have warned

Osbornes Law’s family lawyers say they are seeing increasing numbers of clients whose final hearings are removed from court listings with days to spare, leaving them to pay thousands of pounds in costs. The cancellations are due to a shortage of judges and the backlogs in the family courts. However, the couples affected can expect to wait at least six months for a new listing, leaving them in limbo.

Claire Andrews, family lawyer at Osbornes Law, said: ‘Going through the divorce courts is already a very stressful experience―most are acrimonious couples who have already exhausted all other options.

‘Gearing up for a final court hearing takes months of preparation and barristers must be briefed and paid for their work, often two weeks in advance. While postponements used to be relatively common for lower-level hearings, we are now seeing more and more final hearings cancelled with just one or two days to spare. This runs up huge costs for clients who are still no closer to resolving their disputes.

‘This can be particularly tough for those who are pursuing a higher earning ex for a financial settlement but have small means themselves. I have seen some clients concerned they will run out of money but have little choice but to continue.’

While it is possible to recover some money from HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) in these circumstances, the process is complex and requires an application be made with a detailed breakdown of costs. Moreover, if the court finds every effort was made to source a judge then reimbursement of any costs is unlikely, as HMCTS will state ‘judicial availability is not in the hands of the court administration office’.

Some hearings are categorised as ‘at risk’ which means they can’t be guaranteed, removing any possibility of HMCTS reimbursing costs.

Issue: 7950 / Categories: Legal News , Family , Divorce , Covid-19
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll