header-logo header-logo

14 April 2011 / David Burrows
Issue: 7461 + 7462 / Categories: Features , Mediation , Family
printer mail-detail

Under new rule (3)

In his third FPR update David Burrows looks at costs savings, case management & mediation

Few would disagree that the legal costs associated with most litigation are a blight on the finances of many of the parties involved. With family proceedings, the problem is at its most stark where, often, the parties’ means and the lawyers fees are part of the assets and liabilities over which much family litigation rages.

An argument can be advanced that the new Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010) do little to assist with costs savings. The new rules can be seen—sometimes by omission, sometimes almost deliberately—as stoking up costs: many rules lack logic and will be expensive for the judges to clarify; disclosure rules are confused and aspects of rules as to expert evidence (eg, instruction of joint experts) are deliberately more expensive than under CPR 1998.

This article, the third in the present series, looks at two particular aspects of the scheme which are central to costs saving, and which are new to family proceedings: the Pt 18 procedure for interim hearings and

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

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll