header-logo header-logo

06 January 2011 / David Burrows
Issue: 7447 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Meet the new FPR!

Part one: David Burrows offers some preliminary thoughts on the Family Proceedings Rules 2010

At the tail end of last year—a good time to bury bad news—a new set of family proceedings rules, Family Proceedings Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), were laid before Parliament (SI 2010/2955). They are due to come into operation on 6 April 2011.

These rules have been anticipated since Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR 1998) hit the book stands in late 1998; and they have been in MoJ gestation for five years and more. The resources put into their delivery would be risible; save that they relate to a very important subject for those affected: children and some of the poorer members of society, who are now—in addition—likely to be without legal aid (to add legal aid insult to the injury of the convoluted new rules).

The committee which drafted these rules faced an almost insuperable task. They tried to comprise a substantial array of procedural, jurisdictional, case management and evidential facets to very diverse sets of family proceedings in at least three sets of courts. Inevitably this has obscured

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll