Single Family Court meaning

Stop Press: On 31 March 2026, the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, released consolidated guidance on allocation and gatekeeping for children proceedings in the Family Court, coming into force on 5 May 2026. This replaces the 2014 public and private law guidance and establishes a single framework for allocation across all children cases. It clarifies the functions of gatekeeping teams, aligns allocation choices with contemporary procedural pathways (including Child Focused Courts), and underscores key principles of judicial continuity, proportionality and the efficient deployment of judicial resources, see News Analysis: Consolidated allocation and gatekeeping guidance for children proceedings issued. This Procedural Guide is presently being revised to align with the President’s guidance. It outlines the procedure for applications under section 8 of the Children Act 1989 for a specific issue order to resolve a particular question connected with parental responsibility, or a prohibited steps order limiting the exercise of parental responsibility in a defined respect. It also details who may apply, pre-action obligations, the principles the...

K v P (Criminal Solicitor as Court-Appointed QLR) [2025] EWFC 321 What are the practical implications of this case? Because a QLR is appointed by the court, the court may promptly end the appointment where neutrality is questioned, or if deploying a particular person as QLR could reduce the quality of a witness’s testimony. The considerations the court weighs can equally include a QLR who simply comes from the same firm as the solicitor handling a connected criminal case, despite never having met the witness. It is fairly common for a single firm to act on both a party’s family work and their criminal matters. In addition, although the court could not bring to a close representation by a lawyer whom an alleged abuser instructs outside the QLR scheme, if they choose a lawyer when it is plain that doing so will distress the alleged victim, it may look as though the choice is intended to inflict further distress on the alleged victim. A lawyer who permits themselves...

Pillmoor (as trustee of the bankruptcy estate of Mohammed Erfan Miah) v Miah and another [2019] EWHC 3696 (Ch), [2019] All ER (D) 211 (Oct) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision offers practical direction on claims where one spouse seeks a beneficial stake in a property not held in their legal name. The judgment clarified the threshold for proving a common intention constructive trust, identifying what will, and will not, suffice. The party asserting the interest must adduce evidence of either an explicit arrangement to share the beneficial ownership, or facts from which such an accord can properly be inferred. Accordingly, proof should address matters that bore on ownership and family finances, including: discussions between the spouses that touched on the question of ownership; the role each spouse played in the household’s financial decision-making; how the finances were organised. If the evidential position remains uncertain, that ambiguity is liable to be resolved against the claiming spouse. These...

BY v GC (No 2) [2025] EWFC 397 What are the practical implications of this case? Although the decision does not depart from the prevailing orthodoxy on computation and expert evidence, it remains a practically helpful authority for practitioners. Its utility arises in several ways: It offers a detailed demonstration of how compelling single joint expert (SJE) valuation evidence can be where the expert reaches robust conclusions and presents well at trial (paras [116], [117], [207]). It serves as useful authority for advisers acting for clients (as with the husband in this case) whose own direct personal experience may enable them to give their own opinion evidence on business valuation (para [94]). It may provide some succour to clients whose Daniels v Walker [2000] Lexis Citation 2817, [2000] All ER (D) 608 applications have been refused. Taken together, these points uphold established practice whilst clarifying its practical application...

This Practice Note reviews the factors the court will take into account and the test it will adopt when considering an application by a trustee in bankruptcy (the trustee) seeking orders for possession and sale of the bankrupt’s home, including accommodation occupied by the bankrupt’s family... For further reading on making possession and sale applications and on the timing of any application, see Practice Notes: Possession and sale applications in respect of a bankrupt’s family home The ‘three-year rule’ in bankruptcy under section 283A of the Insolvency Act 1986 Applications for possession and sale of the family home Where a trustee applies to the court for possession and sale, they will, amongst other things, need both an order for sale and an order for vacant possession. In substance this is a two-stage exercise, yet, in practice, it is usually addressed within a single application. If the property is jointly owned, section 14 of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees...

This Practice Note introduces key procedural features of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR), SI 1998/3132, as they relate to claims under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA 1996). The same provisions apply whether proceedings are issued under CPR Part 7 or CPR Part 8; see Practice Note: TOLATA 1996—when to use Part 7 and when to use Part 8. See also Practice Notes: TOLATA 1996—pre-action matters; TOLATA 1996—when to issue in the County Court and when to issue in the High Court; and TOLATA 1996—Part 36 offers. For practical guidance on the court’s approach to TOLATA 1996 claims, see Practice Note: Case law relating to TOLATA 1996 claims and Precedent: Specimen final orders under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996. Costs budgeting Disclosure and inspection Witness statements Expert evidence Costs budgeting Costs budgeting forms part of the court’s duty to regulate costs. Its purpose is to enable the court to...

Adducing expert evidence in private law children proceedings This Practice Note addresses the presentation of expert evidence in private law children cases, setting out the statutory framework (in particular Part 25 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010) and the associated Practice Directions) and also clarifying who qualifies as an expert. It further explores when such evidence is required, the process for seeking permission and the considerations the court must weigh when deciding that application, together with the commissioning of experts, including use of a single joint expert (SJE), and the arrangements for paying the expert’s fees. It also outlines experts’ obligations and the expectation that they attend court. In addition, it explains the need for any expert in children proceedings to satisfy the relevant national standards for experts. For hands-on guidance on evidence in private law children cases, see Practice Note: Evidence in private law children proceedings. At common law, witnesses are to testify to facts rather than opinions, unless the witness is suitably qualified to give...

1 Introduction This letter serves as a joint instruction addressed to you, as an expert on financial remedy matters arising within divorce proceedings between [ client’s full name ] and [ spouse’s full name ], and is provided for that purpose herein. The instruction is made jointly by [ lead firm preparing letter ], representing [ client’s full name ], together with [ name and address of spouse’s solicitors ], [ telephone number and email of spouse’s solicitors ], acting for [ spouse’s full name ]; your opinion is to be provided independently of both parties at all material times. At the first appointment held on [ date of first appointment ], District Judge [ name ], sitting at the Family Court at [ location ], made the following order: [ insert exact wording from order ]. The parties have consented to your appointment on a joint basis as the single joint expert. The scope of your instructions is defined in the order dated [ date of first appointment...

1 Introduction This letter instructs you to act as the single joint expert in financial remedy proceedings arising from divorce proceedings between [ client’s full name ] and [ spouse’s full name ]. You are jointly instructed by [ lead firm preparing letter ] for [ client’s full name ] and by [ name and address of spouse’s solicitors ], [ telephone number and email of spouse’s solicitors ] on behalf of [ spouse’s full name ], on the basis that your expert opinion will remain independent of both parties. At the First Appointment on [ date of first appointment ], District Judge [ name ], sitting at the Family Court at [ location ], made the following order: [ insert exact wording from order ]. The scope of your instructions is confirmed in the order dated [ date of first appointment order ] and in this letter. 2 Arrangements for preparing the report Should you need to discuss the report, whether on a preliminary basis or...

1 Introduction We write to issue a joint instruction to you, an expert in financial remedy matters arising from [ divorce OR dissolution ] proceedings between [ client’s full name ], born on [ insert date of birth ], and [ spouse/civil partner’s full name ], born on [ insert date of birth ]. Your instruction is joint, from [ lead firm preparing letter ], acting for [ client’s full name ], and from [ name and address of spouse/civil partner’s solicitors ], [ telephone number and email of spouse/civil partner’s solicitors ], on behalf of [ spouse/civil partner’s full name ], on the clear understanding that your expert opinion will be independent of both parties. [ At the first appointment on [ date of first appointment ], District Judge [ name ], sitting in the Family Court at [ location ], made the following order: [ insert exact wording from order ]. ] The parties confirm that you are to be instructed jointly as the single joint expert...