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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
In this issue: Practice and procedure Financial provision Public children International children Daily and weekly news alerts At a Glance 2025–2026 Updated content New Q& As Useful information Practice and procedure President of the Family Division delivers speech on changes and future priorities The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew Mc Farlane, addressed the 2025 Resolution national conference, considering decades of evolution in family justice, highlighting recent progress and outlining priorities for the future. He reported that, through collective endeavour, the system has achieved notable reductions since the peaks of the COVID period: approximately a 20% fall in public law cases and around a 30% decrease in private law cases. See: LNB News 19/05/2025 27......
What is the purpose of the FJC guidance? The guidance aims to help judges and legal representatives manage the increasing incidence of covertly made recordings by parties to proceedings. A recurring friction, especially in private law cases about children, arises where one side (often without representation) claims they are recording for their own and the children’s safety, while the other alleges harassment or invasions of privacy. The court must then weigh those competing concerns against the volume and reliability of any such material, the expense of evaluating it, and the overarching welfare of the child. Practitioners may likewise struggle with how to respond when a client produces secret recordings said to support their position. Judges must balance privacy complaints with claims of protection, the scale and soundness of the material, the expense of scrutiny, and children’s welfare overall. Issued roughly two years after an...
Re F ( A Minor) ( Permission To Appeal) [2025] EWHC 638 ( Fam) What are the practical implications of this case? As many High Court appeals arise from reserved or written judgments handed down after the hearing, it is vital for any aggrieved litigant to identify when the 21‑day period starts for seeking permission to appeal. The judgment on appeal stresses the continuing need for a robust and workable appeals regime in practice—one that is, as Mr Justice Warby (as he then was) put it in Monroe v Hopkins (no 2) [2017] EWHC 645 ( QB), ‘clear and understandable’—and which, in the end, puts the onus on the party intending or contemplating an appeal either to make the application promptly or to ask for time to do so from the court if necessary. What was the...
What are the practical implications of this case? The practical ramifications of this decision are notable. It examines the impact of international treaty duties in Article 5 ECHR upon domestic law. At first instance, Lieven J disagreed with Mr Justice Keehan’s reasoning in A Local Authority v D and others [2015] EWHC 3125 ( Fam), [2016] 2 FLR 601, stating that he had merged two discrete issues. Keehan J’s concern was that a local authority is an organ of the State and, therefore, when a child’s liberty is restricted, the State is responsible for a deprivation, necessitating a procedure prescribed by law, proper safeguards and periodical reviews. Lieven J, by contrast, accepted that the child’s restrictions were imposed by the State, yet maintained that this does not mean the local authority, acting as the corporate parent under [section 33 of the Children Act 1989 ( Ch A...
What are the practical implications of this case? In DSD v MJW [2025] EWFC 119 ( B), the court demonstrates how the wide guiding principles for maintenance pending suit ( MPS) function in practice. Where intervention is not clearly necessary, the bid will fail; where it is, reasonableness becomes the controlling measure (para [22]). The judgment sets out typical situations where MPS is properly warranted, including: imminent homelessness; loss of employment with no capital to rely upon; and a categorical refusal to continue established financial support to a vulnerable spouse, etc (para [11]). The decision is also a practical touchstone for those advising financial remedy clients beyond the ‘big money’ arena. DDJ Hodson gives pragmatic direction and highlights creative answers, such as using capital assets to satisfy MPS claims where suitable (para [23]). The need to put forward proposals—and the associated costs consequences of doing so...
Re K and Re S ( Legal Aid: Experts’ Fees) [2025] EWFC 100 What are the practical implications of this case? In his judgment, President Mc Farlane set out the LAA’s amended guidance, alongside general principles to follow when instructing experts who propose a higher charging rate or a greater number of hours than those stipulated in the LAA guidelines, and he supplied model wording for court orders addressing this issue. Moving forward, practitioners must now demonstrate, in any application to the LAA for prior authority where experts’ fees exceed the stated hourly rates or hours, that the case’s complexity demands an expert of high seniority, or that the material is so specialised and unusual that only a very small number of experts are available to report. The updated guidance also permits reliance on additional criteria, namely the total cost of the work, the speed at which it...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Private children Costs International children Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure Family Justice Council 11th open meeting The Family Justice Council is set to host its eleventh open meeting on 7 July 2025, running from 11am to 1.30pm. The event will take place online via MS Teams. Observers are welcome to watch the proceedings, which will end with a question-and-answer segment. Questions for the Council must be submitted ahead of time. Registration is available here. Registration of Marriages and Civil Partnerships ( Registration Provisions) ( Amendment) Regulations 2025 The Registration of Marriages and Civil Partnerships ( Registration Provisions) ( Amendment) Regulations 2025, SI 2025/569, amend the Registration of Marriages Regulations 2015 ( SI 2015/207) and the Civil Partnership ( Registration Provisions) Regulations 2005 ( SI...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Public children Financial provision Lex Talk®Family: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content Content spotlight Useful information Practice and procedure Master of the Rolls delivers speech on Digital Justice System The Master of the Rolls, Sir Geoffrey Vos, gave an address at the International Forum on Online Dispute Resolution, exploring how the Digital Justice System ( DJS) can assist in settling disputes. He underlined the major reforms introduced by the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022, which created the Online Procedure Rule Committee ( OPRC) and its remit to set rules for digital procedures and the pre-action stage. He observed that the OPRC’s powers will sit alongside, not supplant, those of the current rule committees, with the intention that online processes will, in due course, be regulated by...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Domestic abuse Public children Financial provision International children Daily and weekly alerts New Practice Note New Precedent New Q& As Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure Speech by the President of the Family Division: Katherine Gieve Memorial Lecture— Cleveland: Deja Vu? The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew Mc Farlane, delivered the Katherine Gieve Memorial Lecture, titled ‘ Cleveland: Deja Vu?’. Gender recognition ( For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers) In For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16, the Supreme Court considered the text, context and purpose of the Equality Act 2010 in assessing whether, in practice, ‘sex’ should be understood as ‘certificated sex’. For Women Scotland Ltd, an organisation advocating for women’s and children’s rights in Scotland, challenged guidance issued by the Scottish...
Re M ( A Child: Intermediaries) [2025] EWCA Civ 440 What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling will resonate with all practitioners working with vulnerable parties. For years, drawing on several High Court authorities, the prevailing approach to intermediaries under FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, r 3A.7 has been restrained, with appointments or their use viewed as justified only in rare or exceptional situations. The Court of Appeal has disapproved that constricted reading of the discretionary test. It directs judges to decide matters on the facts of the individual case, attending only to the plain structure of FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, r 3A.7 and its requirement of ‘necessity’, and to resist adding any gloss or extra hurdles. The unusual nature of such applications, or the infrequency with which adjournments have been allowed for want of......
In this issue Practice and procedure Emergency procedures Private children Public children Financial provision Costs International children Daily and weekly alerts New content Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure Updated court fees Practitioners should note that, from 8 April 2025, selected court fees in family proceedings increased. See: Updated court fees in family proceedings from April 2025. Also see Practice Note: Current court fees in family proceedings for details of all charges. Family Justice Council Bridget Lindley memorial lecture The Family Justice Council Bridget Lindley memorial lecture, delivered by HHJ Khatun Sapnara on 12 March 2025, is now available to view here. This year’s theme is ‘ Diversity and Inclusion in the Family Justice System: Promoting Best Practice in Decision Making’. Emergency...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Public children Private children International children Lex Talk®Family: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly alerts New content New Q& As Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure Online Procedure Rule Committee meeting minutes The Online Procedure Rule Committee has released the minutes of its 10 February 2025 meeting. Public children Failure to give adequate consideration to expert opinion ( Re F and another ( Fact Finding: Gonorrhoea)) In Re F and another ( Fact Finding: Gonorrhoea) [2025] EWCA Civ 340, an appeal was pursued against a determination that the child’s gonorrhoea resulted from fomite transmission rather than sexual abuse. The six-year-old received the diagnosis in June 2023. The local authority alleged abuse by the mother or the maternal uncle, who had also tested positive around the same period. At first instance, the judge concluded the infection likely arose via fomite transfer linked to the uncle’s poor hygiene, despite expert evidence...
Re Z ( Unlawful Foreign Surrogacy— Adoption) [2025] EWHC 339 ( Fam) What are the practical implications of this case? A stark warning to anyone contemplating unlawful, commercial surrogacy overseas, this judgment candidly exposes the legal hazards they are likely to encounter in practice. The children central to the proceedings met significant obstacles when attempting to return to the UK alongside their intended parents: persistent problems arose with the registration of their births abroad, and the consequence was that, for years, they remained stateless and with nobody able to exercise parental responsibility for either child. Their journey home was impeded, and bureaucratic hurdles around recognition of their births produced prolonged uncertainty. Throughout that period, no adult held lawful authority to make decisions on their behalf. In addition, the court questioned the wisdom of the applicants in proceeding with a surrogacy...
Practice and procedure In this issue: Practice and procedure Public children Private children Financial provision Daily and weekly news alerts New Q& As Updated content Useful information Consultation on expert provisions in the Family Procedure Rules 2010 The Family Procedure Rule Committee ( FPRC) has launched a consultation on a draft rule, FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, r 25.5A, together with revisions to FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, r 25.2 and Practice Directions FPR 2010, PD 25B and PD 25C. The FPRC’s objective is that, subject to specified exceptions, experts instructed in family law children proceedings must be regulated, with the term “regulated expert” defined through amendments to FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, r 25.2. A central aim is to ensure that any expert providing evidence in family law children cases has the requisite...
In this issue Practice and procedure Emergency procedures Public children Private children International children Costs Daily and weekly news alerts New content Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure New code of conduct for investigators The Solicitors Regulation Authority ( SRA) has confirmed that the Association of British Investigators ( ABI) has introduced an updated members’ code of conduct to ensure compliance with the General Data Protection Regulations. Approved by the Information Commissioner’s Office ( ICO), the code is available on the Commissioner’s website. Emergency procedures Domestic Abuse Act 2021 ( Commencement No 7 and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2025, SI 2025/261, alongside Domestic Abuse Act 2021 ( Commencement No 8 and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2025, SI 2025/319, bring Part 3 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 into effect, so far as not already commenced, on a pilot basis from 11 March 2025. This excludes section 55 of the 2021 Act (which repeals domestic violence protection notices and...
In this issue: Practice and procedure Private children Financial provision Costs International International children Lex Talk®Family: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New flowcharts Updated content New Q& As Useful information Practice and procedure Family Procedure Rules 2010 Practice Direction Update No 1 of 2025 The first update to the Family Procedure Rules 2010 ( FPR 2010) Practice Directions in 2025 has been released, revising five existing PDs and adding a fresh pilot PD. A new FPR 2010, PD 36ZH ( Pilot scheme: expedited financial remedy process) is introduced for financial remedy matters where the parties’ combined net assets are thought to be below £250,000 (pensions excluded) and the application is filed in a pilot court. The pilot is intended to commence on 7 April 2025. The update also permits a permission application following an order under section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 ( Ch A 1989) to be lodged on Form C100, or its online...
S (through his litigation friend, James Alexander Netto) v F and another [2025] EWHC 439 ( Fam) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling is significant for private law practitioners confronting the difficult issue of how a court should, and will, approach the clearly expressed views of a Gillick-competent child (per Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority [1986] 1 FLR 224). The court stressed the need not to merge ‘wishes’ with ‘feelings’, observing that a child’s feelings can be ‘most eloquently articulated by what they do not say’ (para [27(viii)]). A child’s wishes attract substantial, but not conclusive, weight; the ultimate best interests determination is made by evaluating the child’s welfare in the round. The judgment is also instructive when using the jurisdictional bridge between private and public law available under section 37 of the Children Act 1989 ( Ch A...
Court and tribunal fees: updates from April 2025 What is changing? In April 2025, and subject to parliamentary approval, a selection of court and tribunal fees, including many in family matters, are expected to rise. The plan is for the revised charges to apply from 1 April 2025 to applications received by courts or tribunals on or after that date. Until then, the existing fees listed in the Schedule to the Family Proceedings Fees Order 2008, SI 2008/1054, will remain in place. Changes are also anticipated for certain civil and magistrates’ court fees. See: Court and tribunal fees: updates from April 2025. What are the reasons for the changes? The Ministry of Justice has indicated that most affected fees will go up by 3.2%, reflecting the CPI movement from March 2023 to March 2024. A smaller group will increase by 13.5% to account for inflation...
Vince v Vince [2024] EWFC 406; DAV v KV [2024] EWFC 389 What are the practical implications of this case? Importantly, the judgment confirms that if a transparency order exists and at least one ‘reporter’ has attended the hearing, the materials authorised for disclosure under that order can then be passed on by the attendee to reporters who did not attend. Attendance can be remote, in line with Family Procedure Rules 2010, PD 27B, para 5D.1; nevertheless, as a matter of good practice, a reporter’s mode of attendance should ideally mirror that of the hearing. This is conditional upon promptly serving the transparency order on the non-attending reporters, and upon ensuring the documents are not circulated or shared before the court hearing to which they relate......
In this issue: Practice and procedure Emergency procedures Financial provision Public children Private children Gender recognition International children Costs Daily and weekly news alerts New content Updated content New Q& As Useful information Practice and procedure President of the Family Division publishes guidance for family judges on writing to children Sir Andrew Mc Farlane, President of the Family Division, has issued fresh guidance for family judges on composing letters to children involved in court proceedings. Produced in partnership with the Family Justice Young People’s Board, it is designed to enhance communication by offering a toolkit that enables judges to explain their decisions to children. The programme aims to embed this form of communication as routine practice, so that children can understand and process the outcomes of their cases. See: LNB News 26/02/2025 20. Survey on special measures in family proceedings The Ministry of Justice and HM Courts and Tribunals Service ( HMCTS) are undertaking a project to develop a clearer...
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
