header-logo header-logo

10 January 2017
Issue: 7729 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Protecting domestic abuse victims

Emergency review set up to prevent perpretrators cross-examining victims in family court

Primary legislation could be introduced with “urgency” to ban alleged domestic abuse perpetrators from cross-examining their victims in the family courts.

Justice Secretary Liz Truss last week announced she was setting up an emergency review to find the quickest way to bring the family courts into line with the criminal courts, where such cross-examinations have been stopped. According to research by Women’s Aid, a quarter of domestic violence victims who appear in the family courts have been cross-examined by their abusive former partners.

Justice minister Oliver Heald told MPs this week that primary legislation would be required, and that a consultation with survivors’ groups may not be necessary because the proposed ban is straightforward. The move by ministers follows calls by Sir James Munby, England and Wales’ most senior family judge, for urgent reform of the way in which vulnerable people give evidence in family proceedings.

Family law solicitor David Burrows said “the unmet needs of vulnerable individuals in family proceedings go much wider than” alleged abusers cross-examining abused parties and witnesses.

He highlighted that a working group set up by Sir James produced draft rules on vulnerable witnesses in mid-2015. “The draft took many leads from criminal proceedings under Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (special measures to help children and vulnerable witnesses),” he said.

“The draft covers children and vulnerable individuals. It includes—but this is only one element—provision for those who are subjected to further abuse by being cross-examined in person by their alleged abuser. Victims include one of a former couple, a child who gives evidence proceedings, or any other witness in family proceedings.

“The Ministry of Justice is aware that the rules amendments have resources implications, but so too have the 1999 adjustments in criminal proceedings. In family proceedings, legal aid could be used in European Convention 1950 exceptional case funding for vulnerable parties and children, and many of the criminal proceedings measures are already available, but not used, in family proceedings, as Lady Hale has pointed out in Re A (Sexual Abuse: Disclosure) [2012] UKSC 60.” 

Issue: 7729 / Categories: Legal News
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