Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
View all articles
Authors

Excessive costs and J v J: a practitioner response (£)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:36 PM
family law, J v J [2014] EWHC 3654 (Fam)​, procedural rule changes, legal costs
The recent judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in the North West of England case ​​J v J [2014] EWHC 3654 (Fam)​ raises some important issues for the family legal profession.
Slug : excessive-costs-and-j-v-j-a-practitioner-response
Meta Title : Excessive costs and J v J: a practitioner response (£)
Meta Keywords : family law, J v J [2014] EWHC 3654 (Fam)​, procedural rule changes, legal costs
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jan 16, 2015, 05:29 AM
Article ID : 108251
The recent judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in the North West of England case J v J [2014] EWHC 3654 (Fam) raises some important issues for the family legal profession. There are many matters dealt within the judgment which are reminders and, in this instance, stern reminders of those areas where practice lags behind recent or not so recent procedural rule changes. There are others opined upon by His Lordship which practitioners, including this author, might find hard to accept as valid or an acceptable appraisal of the current approach of practitioners to the court process and their legal costs relationship with their clients. There are other views expressed by Mostyn J which, with respect, some will regard as simply wrong.

The full version of this article appears in the January 2015 issue of Family Law.

For details on how you can subscribe to Family Law or for any offers, please contact a member of our sales team: Tel 0117 918 1555, or email:sales.manager@jordanpublishing.co.uk
Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
Family_Law
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Load more comments
Comment by from