Featured documents
R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
Most recent News
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council v EKK (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor) [2025] EWCOP 42 What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reaffirms that the capacity to marry is tied to the ‘act’ or ‘status’ itself, not to a particular ‘person’ or prospective ‘spouse’. Accordingly, when assessing P, the enquiry is whether P can decide to marry at all, rather than whether they can decide to marry a specific individual. Nonetheless, stepping back, the decision may muddy the waters more than it clarifies. Practically, a person might be judged to have capacity to marry on an ‘act’/‘status’ basis, yet lack capacity to have contact with the person they wish to marry, which is a ‘person’ specific assessment. The court was not called upon to resolve how these positions interact, though the judge did note the peculiarity of P having capacity to marry but not to...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Public children Private children Financial provision International children Daily and weekly news alerts New Q& As Useful information Practice and procedure New FPR 2010, PD 27A on bundles—what are the main changes? The sixth Practice Direction Update 2025 unveiled a replacement Practice Direction to the Family Procedure Rules 2010 dealing with court bundles, namely FPR 2010, PD 27A ( Family proceedings: court bundles). It takes effect on 2 March 2026 and supersedes the earlier PD 27A in full. Strict adherence to FPR 2010, PD 27A is required to secure uniformity across England and Wales, both in the Family Court and the Family Division of the High Court, when preparing and lodging bundles. From 2 March 2026, compliance is compulsory for every hearing, with no transitional arrangements. The text has been structurally overhauled and has grown to more than twice its former length. Before 2 March 2026, PD 27A...
Family proceedings: court bundles The sixth Practice Direction Update in 2025 unveiled a revised Family Procedure Rules 2010 ( FPR 2010), PD 27A ( Family proceedings: court bundles), taking effect on 2 March 2026 and wholly superseding the earlier PD 27A in its entirety. Adherence to FPR 2010, PD 27A is required to secure uniform practice across England and Wales, throughout the Family Court and the Family Division of the High Court, for assembling and lodging court bundles effectively in those courts. From 2 March 2026, every hearing must comply fully, with no transitional arrangements or grace period whatsoever. PD 27A has been reorganised structurally and expanded to more than twice its previous length. Before 2 March 2026, PD 27A appeared as one continuous sequence of paragraphs without chapters. After that date, it contains 19 chapters, ordered by subject matter. The...
Significance and Impact of the Digital Assets Act 2025 The Digital Assets Act 2025: The wording The preamble to the Digital Assets Act 2025 explains that the legislation makes provision concerning the kinds of things that are not barred from being the subject of personal property rights. It is a concise statute. Section 1 provides that a “thing” — including one that is digital or electronic in character — is not disqualified from being the object of personal property rights simply because it is neither (a) a thing in possession nor (b) a thing in action. Put differently, and by virtue of the Act, even where a thing (including one that is digital or electronic in character) does not fit the orthodox property categories — namely, things in possession (items capable of physical possession) or things in action (property claimable or enforceable through court...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Public children Financial provision Daily and weekly news alerts New content Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure Family Procedure Rules Committee meeting minutes The Family Procedure Rule Committee has now published the minutes from its meeting held on 1 December 2025. Master of the Rolls speech addresses AI integration in civil and criminal justice systems On 4 February 2026, the Master of the Rolls, Sir Geoffrey Vos, outlined how artificial intelligence ( AI) could enable civil and criminal justice outcomes to be reached more swiftly and efficiently than by human decision-makers alone. He noted that a Digital Justice System is being developed under the Online Procedure Rules Committee, while stressing that human oversight must remain integral to final justice decisions. He also questioned whether machines can amount to ‘independent and impartial tribunals’ for the purposes of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights ( ECHR). The speech...
In this issue: Private children Public children Financial provision International children Court of Protection Lex Talk®Family: a Lexis®Nexis community Updated content Daily and weekly news alerts Useful information Private children Child arrangements orders ( The Mother v The Father and others) In The Mother v The Father and others [2025] EWFC 482, the mother sought in the Family Court a child arrangements order for her eight-year-old to reside with her, together with permission to relocate the child permanently to Latvia. The maternal great-aunt and uncle issued a cross-application for the child to live with them. She contended the placement with the great-aunt and uncle was always a temporary measure whilst she completed medical training; alleged they had impeded contact and alienated the child from her for over two years; asserted there were no welfare or safeguarding concerns in her care; and argued that delay would embed harm. Cafcass endorsed relocation following a brief...
Mac Donald J upheld an appeal challenging the rejection of a mother’s bid to secure a child maintenance determination pursuant to Council Regulation ( EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and co-operation in matters concerning maintenance obligations (the EU Maintenance Regulation). The court found the Family Court’s jurisdiction persisted notwithstanding the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, and that the application was wrongly dismissed for purported non-compliance. The judgment further highlights the grave practical obstacles encountered by parties in cross-border maintenance matters, and how such impediments can frustrate the aims of international child maintenance frameworks. MM v FF ( Maintenance: Scope of EU Withdrawal Agreement) [2026] EWFC 1 What are the practical implications of this case? The judgment contains unusually detailed and pointed observations about the experience of litigants in cross-border maintenance cases and the...
University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and another v AB (by his litigation friend, the Official Solicitor) and others [2025] EWCOP 45 ( T3) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment shows that the Court of Protection possesses the necessary mechanisms to ensure its best interests decisions are carried into effect. For lawyers advising NHS Trusts, it offers guidance on planning how such best interests outcomes can be realised. It clarifies routes to implementation and reinforces practical steps towards compliance for trusts and advisers alike. It equips those practitioners to support their clients and the court by explaining how the court may exercise its powers to secure compliance, the provenance of those powers, and the possible extent to which a court may go in compelling adherence. It is noteworthy that Williams J described the orders as ‘rare’ and...
In this issue: Relationship breakdown Domestic abuse Public children Private children Financial provision International children Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content Useful information Relationship breakdown New divorce law release note HM Courts and Tribunals Service has issued a new divorce law release note confirming that from 5 January 2026, solicitors will be able to remove a draft case. The matter will then move to a withdrawn status on manage cases/core case data ( CCD). After submit has been selected, solicitors will no longer be able to view the matter. Where the matter has been shared with colleagues, they will likewise lose access. Solicitors will receive an email notification confirming that the matter has been withdrawn. Domestic abuse Inspectorates find inconsistent recognition of children as domestic abuse victims despite Domestic Abuse Act 2021 Ofsted, the Care Quality Commission ( CQC), HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services ( HMICFRS), and HM...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Private children Financial provision International children Court of Protection Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure Extension of transparency pilot for financial remedy proceedings The national lead and the deputy national lead judges for the Financial Remedies Court, Mr Justice Peel and His Honour Judge Hess, have, with the approval of the President of the Family Division, released an update on the transparency pilot for financial remedy proceedings, confirming that the pilot scheme will run for a further year from 30 January 2026 until 29 January 2027. Earlier, on 11 December 2023, the President issued guidance in advance of the pilot’s launch, and the scheme began on 29 January 2024 in Birmingham, Leeds and the Central Family Court. From 11 November 2024 the scheme was widened to the Royal...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Public children International children Daily and weekly news alerts New content Updated content New Q& As Useful information Practice and procedure Non-molestation orders guidance comes into effect Guidance 2026: Non- Molestation Orders under the Family Law Act 1996, issued by the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew Mc Farlane, came into force on 12 January 2026, having been published in December 2025 and replacing the 2023 Practice Guidance. The Family Justice Council’s guidance, which is to be read alongside the President’s document, likewise took effect on 12 January 2026. See: LNB News 18/12/2025 3. Death of Sir James Munby The family justice community mourns with great sadness the passing of The Rt Hon Sir James Munby, who died on New Year’s Day 2026. For over three decades, Sir James was a leading figure in...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Public children Private children Financial provision International children Lex Talk®Family: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content New Q& As Useful information Practice and procedure The Court of Appeal ( Civil Division) Guide 2025 has been updated The Court of Appeal ( Civil Division) Guide 2025 has been revised, with three additional chapters on consent orders, Mc Kenzie Friends and out‑of‑hours applications. Practitioners should ensure they are using the edition labelled ‘ June 2025 (second version)’. The updated guide can be accessed here. See: LNB News 19/12/2025 15. ALC’s Family Justice Strategy for the South East event The Association of Lawyers for Children ( ALC) has announced a regional session following the recent Practice Note protocols issued by Mrs Justice Arbuthnot and Ms Justice Henke for the South East...
In this issue: Family Weekly Highlights 2025/2026 Practice and procedure Emergency procedures Public children Private children International children Daily and weekly news alerts New Practice Notes Updated content New Q& As Useful information Family Weekly Highlights 2025/2026 This edition marks our last Weekly Highlights of 2025. The opening Weekly Highlights for 2026 will appear on 8 January 2026 and be sent to customers by email on 9 January 2026. To find out how to stay current with news each day and week, please refer to the ‘ Daily and weekly news alerts’ section. The Family team sends warm wishes to all for a restful festive season and a happy new year. Practice and procedure Family Justice Council Schwartz Round The Family Justice Council’s experts working group will host an online Schwartz Round on 29 January 2026 from 5 pm to 6 pm. Schwartz Rounds are predominantly found in clinical settings and provide a structured forum where...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Public children Private children Financial provision International children Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure OPRC opens consultation on inaugural Online Procedure Rules under the 2022 Act The Online Procedure Rule Committee ( OPRC) is consulting on the first Online Procedure Rules to be made under the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022. The draft Online Procedure ( Core Rules and Pilot Schemes) Rules 2026 are designed to oversee online proceedings across the civil, family and tribunals jurisdictions. At first, coverage will be limited to possession proceedings, with a view to extending to all proceedings within the scope of the Online Procedure Rules in due course. The consultation closes on 15 January 2026. Responses can be submitted online or sent by email to...
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...
FPR 2010, PD Update No 6 of 2025 New FPR 2010, PD 27A—court bundles The PD Update introduces a replacement Practice Direction for FPR 2010, PD 27A ( Family proceedings: Court bundles (universal practice to be applied in the High Court and Family Court)). Among other points, the refreshed PD 27A: adopts e-bundles as the default approach requires, where feasible, the use of Arial or Times New Roman sets distinct rules for the layout and contents of bundles in financial remedy cases and in other proceedings (including private children matters and public children matters) accelerates the timetable for preparing and lodging the bundle; for example, apart from the preliminary documents, the bundle must be filed five working days before the hearing rather than two Linked amendments are also made to existing PDs to refresh...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Domestic abuse Private children Public children Financial provision International children Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure Family Procedure Rules 2010 Practice Direction Update No 6 of 2025 Family Procedure Rules 2010 ( FPR 2010), Practice Direction ( PD) Update No 6 of 2025 has been published introducing a new PD 27A, superseding the existing FPR 2010, PD 27A on the assembling and lodging of bundles, coming into force on 2 March 2026. The revised PD 27A accelerates the timetable for preparing and lodging the bundle; save for the preliminary documents, the bundle must now be filed five working days before the hearing, rather than two. The Update also makes changes to eight other PDs. See News Analysis: Family Procedure Rules 2010 Practice Direction Update No 6 of...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Domestic abuse Private children Financial provision Enforcement International children Updated content New content Daily and weekly news alerts Useful information Practice and procedure Family Procedure Rule Committee meeting minutes The Family Procedure Rule Committee has made public the record of its meeting on 6 October 2025. Lady Chief Justice publishes annual report The Lady Chief Justice of England and Wales has issued her annual report spanning October 2024 to September 2025 and emphasising the expansion of the Pathfinder family courts under FPR 2010, PD 36Z. See: LNB News 13/11/2025 7. Domestic abuse Speech by the President of the Family Division—domestic abuse and the Family Court On 14 November 2025, the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew Mc Farlane, delivered a speech to the Association of Lawyers for Children annual conference on the most...
A v N ( R intervening) [2025] EWFC 371 ( B) What was the background? The applicant wife ( W) and the respondent husband ( H) wed in March 1996 after living together for two years, amounting to a near three-decade marriage when the cohabitation is counted. The intervenor was W’s mother ( R). The parties had five children; only the youngest, T, now aged 15, remains under 18, although several of the older children have continued to reside in the family property. The former matrimonial home ( FMH) was acquired on 13 February 2012 in H and W’s joint names. It was accepted by both that the purchase would not have been possible without funds from R, and that from the outset the plan was for R to share the FMH with them. The completion statement recorded a £130,000...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Financial provision Public children International children Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content New Q& As Useful information Practice and procedure Family Procedure Rules 2010 Practice Direction Update No 5 of 2025 The fifth update to the FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955 Practice Directions for 2025 has now been released, introducing a single amendment to FPR 2010, PD 36Z ( Pilot scheme: Private law reform: Investigative approach), which underpins the Pathfinder pilot. Pathfinder is being tested in selected courts, trialling a revised procedural route for specified private law children proceedings, replacing the Child Arrangements Programme. Earlier in 2025, the third FPR 2010 PD Update extended FPR 2010, PD 36Z to three Designated Family Judge areas: the Black Country and Shropshire, Hereford and Worcestershire, and Staffordshire. The Family Court locations within these three areas were set out in a...
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
