LexisNexis will publish the 25th edition of the Family Court Practice 2017 (the Red Book) at the end of this month. Since the Red Book first arrived on family practitioners’ desks in 1993, the legal landscape has undergone huge change, and the Red Book has almost doubled in size. It was conceived as an essential, comprehensive and definitive work covering, in a single volume, the entire range of family proceedings at every level of court. The Red Book is now accompanied by an Autumn Supplement and an online service. It is widely regarded as the seminal work for all who practise in the Family Court, and has been described by Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division’ as ‘indispensable’.
18 May 2017
The Red Book hits 25
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams
Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant
Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias
International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
