header-logo header-logo

02 October 2014
Issue: 7624 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line
printer mail-detail

Ping pongs

The practice was that HM Revenue and Customs would refuse to disclose an address for a respondent to matrimonial proceedings so that they could be served on him without an order from the Principal Registry of the Family Division (PRFD) which led to the absurdity of a petition having to be transferred to the PRFD simply to procure such an order. What is the current requirement given that the Central Family Court is now with us and the role of the PRFD has changed?

An order directed to HMRC for the disclosure of information about a party’s address must be made under the inherent jurisdiction in accordance with the Guidance issued by the President’s Office (November 2003). Where such an order is sought in a case proceeding in the family court, the proceedings must be transferred to the High Court under FPR 2010, r 29.17 and PD29C. Although, in most circumstances, a case may only be transferred to the High Court by a judge of the High Court or above, a transfer for the purpose of a disclosure order may be made by any judge of the

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