Family Law

Roger McCarthy:

• The article includes a short explanation of the important features and case law in the two decisions in Re A and L [2011] EWCA Civ 1205 and 1611. The decisions summarise how the Court of Appeal will treat judges' ex tempore decisions where important topics have not been spelt out.
• The article outlines some uncomfortable questions which arise from the two decisions:
• Is it the Court of Appeal's ability to understand the reasons in the judgment which matters or is it that of the parties?
• If parties do not understand because of gaps in the judgment does this matter?
• What is the significance of the appellate assumption about what judges know and think?
• Does the length of the judge's experience (however long or short) help with an understanding of the judgment?
• Is there any precise minimum content which must appear in any judgment?
• Are litigants in person in person required to accept the adequacy of ex tempore reasons?