The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
Meta Title :Length of High Court financial remedy case skeleton arguments to be reduced
Meta Keywords :family law, financial remedy hearings, Mostyn J, guidance, length, skeleton arguments, efficient conduct, high court judge
Canonical URL :
Trending Article :
Prioritise In Trending Articles :
Jan 20, 2016, 05:34 AM
Article ID :111401
The recent drive to ensure court documents are kept concise is continuing, with Mostyn J revising his guidance on the efficient conduct of financial remedy hearings allocated to a High Court Judge. This follows on from the President’s latest consultation on PD27A, in which he asked practitioners’ views on regulating the length of individual documents, such as chronologies, skeletons and witness statements (amongst others).
Mostyn J’s guidance, which was last revised in July 2015, only applies to a small proportion of financial remedy cases – those that have hearings allocated to a High Court Judge (whether sitting at the RCJ or elsewhere).
Paragraph 15 of the guidance has been altered to limit the length of skeleton arguments submitted to court. Previously a skeleton argument could not exceed 25 pages, this has now been reduced as follows:
‘i. For the first appointment, or any other interim hearing, 10 pages
(including any attached schedules);
ii. For the FDR 15 pages (excluding agreed documents but including
any other appended schedules);
iii. For the final hearing 20 pages (excluding agreed documents
under para 13 above, but including any other appended
Paragraph 16, which provides that if a skeleton is going to exceed a certain length a direction to that effect should be sought at the Pre-Trial Review, has also been revised to change the page limit from 25 pages to 20.
The revised guidance will take effect from 1 February 2016 and the whole document can be found here.