The Ministry of Justice has published a page on the gov.uk website bringing together guidance for legal professionals on the new rules for various areas of legal practice. The page can be found here....
It is 27 years since Denzil Lush first produced this book, some subsequent editions of which one has had the pleasure of reviewing for Family Law, and which, for some reason, does not figure as much...
The Domestic Abuse Bill received its second reading in the House of Lords on 5 January 2021. The committee stage, where the bill will be scrutinised line-by-line, does not yet have a confirmed date....
The Financial Remedies Working Group – Essential Update
Sep 29, 2018, 22:02 PM
family law, report of the Financial Remedies Working Group, arbitration, reforms, FDR, financial relief, MIAM, litigants in person
The dust is only just starting to settle following the April 2014 changes in the family law arena, but now two reports have been published dealing with further changes to family proceedings. This Essential Update deals with the report of the Financial Remedies Working Group.
Meta Title :The Financial Remedies Working Group – Essential Update
Meta Keywords :family law, report of the Financial Remedies Working Group, arbitration, reforms, FDR, financial relief, MIAM, litigants in person
Canonical URL :
Trending Article :
Prioritise In Trending Articles :
Aug 13, 2014, 04:35 AM
Article ID :106745
The dust is only just starting to settle
following the April 2014 changes in the family law arena, but now two reports
have been published dealing with further changes to family proceedings.
Readers of Family Law will recall that The President’s 12th ‘View from the President’s Chambers’, published on 4 June 2014, introduced two
working groups which were to produce their interim reports by 31 July 2014; the
Children and Vulnerable Witness Working Group and the Financial Remedies
Working Group (who are working on the new Money Arrangements Programme – the
The report considers that the current
procedure of Form Es, FDA, FDR and final hearing works well and should
continue. But it recommends a number of improvements, some of which would
necessitate changes to the FPR 2010.
Of note is that there is an emphasis on
resolution of disputes through FDRs and family arbitration.
The key to the proposals is the adoption of
a unified procedure for all financial remedy proceedings. There is a focus on dispute resolution and on
the needs of Litigants in Person, as well as a proposed standard set of court
12 August 2014 – The report of the Financial Remedies Working Group was circulated.
No date has been given yet for the proposed
changes being implemented, so there’s still time to make your views known as
part of the consultation.
Autumn 2014 – The pilot Accelerated
First Appointment procedure (currently in use at the Central Family Court –
available here) will be reviewed.
October or November 2014 – proposed amendments to the FPR 2010 regarding re-opening
first instance orders and setting aside a final order in specified
circumstances will be considered by FPRC.
This will apply to all financial remedies
applications, including financial order applications after a divorce and
Children Act Schedule 1 applications.
For applications under Part III Matrimonial and
Family Proceedings Act 1984 (financial relief after an overseas divorce), the
recommendation is that once permission has been obtained under section 13, the
application should continue under the unified procedure.
Review of the availability of financial proceedings
Now that we are established in the era of the single
family court, the report recommends a review of the separate financial
jurisdiction contained in Part I of the Domestic Proceedings and Magistrates
Court Act 1978.
Reconsideration of the short cut Chapter V FPR 2010
Of note to practitioners is that this will have the
effect of reinstating compulsory FDRs in variation and Sch 1 Children Act
Instead, the shorter procedures will be limited to
international applications under the Maintenance Regulation or the Hague
Review of international enforcement procedures
It is recommended that a review of these procedures
should be undertaken promptly, to take into account the new single family
court. No further detail is given at this stage.
A simplification of the number of financial remedy forms
is envisaged. Instead it is proposed
that there will be one form; the Form E (with the E1 and E2 being scrapped). This will be adapted to take into account
that its new intended use in all financial remedy applications.
The proposed draft is available here (it still looks like a Form E, no radical changes –
it has just been tweaked).
Commencement of financial remedy proceedings
It is proposed that it will no longer be necessary
for both parties to a marriage to issue Form As to have their financial remedy
applications considered. Once a Form A
has been issued by one of the parties, all possible applications will be up for
consideration by the court. This proposal means that solicitors will no longer
be drafting Forms A ‘for dismissal purposes only’.
Dispute resolution is one of the key themes
throughout the report.
It is recommended that FDR hearings should be
compulsory in financial remedy applications, usually taking place on the first
occasion the parties attend court.
The FPR 2010 will be amended to require the parties
to attend court prepared for an FDR.
Applications for financial relief after an overseas
The report recommends that consideration be given to
whether, in the family court, an application for leave (even where opposed) should
be heard by a judge of High Court level, and be made automatically without notice,
with the court having power to direct that it be heard on notice.
De-linking financial remedy applications
It is recommended that financial order applications
should be de-linked from divorce / dissolution proceedings (although the report
notes that from an IT systems point of view this would currently be difficult
Choice of court location
It is recommended that the Central Family Court
should be an available point of entry for financial remedy applications for
applicants who may want to take advantage of the specialism of the Financial
MIAM and Non-Court Dispute Resolution
Again on the theme of dispute resolution, and with a
view to encouraging take-up of MIAMs, the report makes some recommendations
which practitioners may be pleased to note.
The report supports the proposal that the MoJ should
consider paying for all MIAMs for a period of twelve months.
There is also support for the recommendation that the
£200 settlement fee for obtaining a consent order following mediation should be
increased to £300.
The recent development of specialist family arbitration leads the report
to recommend procedural changes with a view to ensuring the adoption of
arbitral awards in the Family Court as swiftly and simply as possible. It is
also recommended that a Family Division equivalent of Form N8 should be devised. Courts’ power to order payment of outgoings
Practitioners will be aware that previously
provisions relating, for example, to one party paying the mortgage on behalf of
the other, were included by way of undertaking.
The report makes it clear that the court has the power to impose and order
Guidance for Litigants in Person
A draft form of guidance has been prepared which will
be sent to LiPs when financial remedy proceedings are issued. A copy of the draft is available here.
Clearer language in court orders for LiPs
In order to make orders clearer for LiPs, the report
recommends considering the language used, such as using the parties’ names
instead of 'Applicant and Respondent' and saying 'send to the court and the
other party' instead of 'file and serve.'
However, it is specifically noted that orders must be
complied with by LiPs as much as by advocates.
Recommendations have been made for specific training
for the judiciary to enable them to deal more effectively with LiPs, for
example by taking a more inquisitorial approach.
Standard form orders in financial remedy proceedings
The adoption of some standard form financial orders
was recommended. The draft orders are
available as part of the consultation here.
(1) This is an
interim report so now is the time to familiarise yourself with the proposals
and consider your views.
(2) In the
meantime, if after reading the report, you have any observations, send them to
the President’s Private Secretary, Alex Clark, by email to: Alex.firstname.lastname@example.org
yourself with the draft standard orders and consider using them where
(4) Keep an eye on
Family Law for further updates on the MAP.