“Mostly difficulties do not lie in the generalities which these draft rules deal with, but in particular types of proceedings and need for help for the vulnerable, for which payment must be made (and thus these rules do not provide) eg
How do you, get into court and pay for, and advocate to cross-examine in the H v L&R case; or guarantee it will happen?
How do you get the judge to realise that a person cannot read?
How do you pay for court documents to be copied because someone cannot read English
How do you get evidence to court where a person cannot face their (alleged) abuser?
How do you pay for an advocate to the court where confidential documents must not be read by a party?
Are any aspects of all this different if a party is in person (a point picked up in the original July 2014 working paper, but lost since)?”
Response to consultation
This response to the Ministry of Justice draft consultation on amendments to Family Procedure Rules 2010 in relation to children and vulnerable individuals (‘the draft’) is prepared by David Burrows. He is a 42 year admitted family law specialist solicitor advocate who has chaired Resolution (then SFLA), who was an enthusiast from the start for much of what was in Report of the Committee on One-Parent Families July 1974 Cmnd 5629 and who is a founder contributor to Family Court Practice (the ‘Red Book’). He continues to specialise in family and administrative law: as a practising lawyer, teacher, writer and jurist.
This response traces the back-ground to the draft and then goes on to a factor which FPRC seem to have neglected – fudged even (as will appear): namely to look at the statutory or common law underpinning of the proposed reforms. The FPRC…
View original post 10,716 more words