Do the Beckhams and Rooneys prove you should stay in a marriage and work at it?

Posted on 30th October 202330th October 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Do the Beckhams and Rooneys prove you should stay in a marriage and work at it?

With the press full of stories about the Beckhams and Rooneys and their historical marriage woes, McAlister Family Law Partner, Lisa Brown, raises the question of whether it is the right thing to stay in a marriage when it is floundering or not?

Both the Beckhams and the Rooneys appear to have navigated troubled waters and arguably come out stronger but that is not always the case and there is no one right answer as to how hard is too hard when it comes to fighting for a relationship.

If I start divorce proceedings is there no way back?

From a legal perspective should you decide to start divorce proceedings there is still a way back until the final divorce order as you can effectively ask the court to cancel the proceedings. It is rare that this happens as for lots of people the process of separating their finances and resolving issues in relation to the children can polarise them further. Having said that there are couples who go through the entire process only to get re-married again!

Does it matter if I am the one who ends it?

Sometimes the making of the initial decision can be the hardest part and it can also colour how the parties deal with the practical elements of separation. For example, where it was more one person’s desire than the others, they can feel guilty and end up walking away with less than they deserve.

The process of divorce and all that comes with it is inevitably driven by emotions, but parties do need to understand that with the financial settlement they only get one chance to get it right and if they agree something which is overly generous or, conversely, which doesn’t meet their needs they may end up regretting it.

From a legal point of view, it will not have any impact who ends the relationship nor whose fault it is. Part of the reasoning behind that is that if some account was taken of who left who and the circumstances of that in determining either financial or child arrangement issues then the courts would be full of people arguing about whose fault the demise of the relationship actually was. Relationships are complex and this would lead to greater uncertainty and cost in litigation.

So, what should I do?

There is perhaps a reluctance to speak to a divorce lawyer when a relationship may be struggling- almost as if in doing so you are accepting the relationship is over. Like most things in life though it is far better to be aware of what might happen than end up potentially going into the situation blind.

Added to that there are many different myths about family law which are frequently repeated, but wholly inaccurate and inevitably most people will know somebody who has had a “bad” divorce with it being long fought, expensive, acrimonious or all of those things. This can inadvertently impact your view and cause unnecessary stress and worry.

Speaking to somebody who can guide you through the legal process could help crystallise your decision one way or another. A divorce/ family solicitor shouldn’t be pushing you into a divorce but instead should set out the various legal options and processes to allow you to make an informed decision. Advice given is always completely confidential.

If you are in a relationship that is struggling at present my advice would be to speak to one of our specialist family solicitors so you can make a decision about your future with all of the facts.

If you or someone you know is affected by the issues raised in this blog post, we can provide you with expert legal advice. For more information, please get in touch with our specialist team at hello@mcalisterfamilylaw.co.uk

Dealing with allegations of child abuse in the Family Court

Posted on 24th August 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Dealing with allegations of child abuse in the Family Court

Here, McAlister Family Law Senior Associate, Melissa Jones, looks at a story making headlines; Titanic Actor, Ioan Gruffudd has made allegations against his children’s mother, Alice Evan, and has labelled her a “child abuser” in court documents issued in Los Angeles.

The allegations in the court documents state: “Alice has continued to inflict serious emotional harm on Ella and Elsie by her statements and by interfering in my relationship with them’ and ‘Alice has verbally abused and undermined me in front of the girls throughout their lives.’

In this case there is an allegation that the father is being alienated from his children as a direct result of the other parent’s influence over the children.

What is Parental Alienation?

There is no definition in family law but Cafcass have provided helpful guidance. Cafcass use it “to describe circumstances where there is an ongoing pattern of negative attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of one parent (or carer) that have the potential or expressed intent to undermine or obstruct the child’s relationship with the other parent. It is one of a number of reasons why a child may reject or resist spending time with one parent post-separation”.

Below are some examples of parental alienation, which covers a variety of behaviours in the child, such as:

fear, hostility, or disrespect towards the distant parent
the child constantly criticising the alienated parent, with no strong evidence or justifications for doing so
the child having overwhelmingly negative feelings towards the alienated parent – in the sense that these feelings are not ‘mixed’
the child having unwavering support of the alienator
the child using terms and phrases that seem to be borrowed from adult language
the child does not feel guilty about mistreating or hating the alienated parent

How does the Court deal with allegations of alienation?

This of course a case in USA, but we will take a look at what the court would do if such allegations were made in a court in England and Wales.

The law, as it stands, presumes that it is in the children’s best interests for each parent, even when they have separated, to continue to be involved in the lives of any and all of their children, unless such involvement may subject them to a risk of harm.

But is it child abuse?

The Chief Executive of CAFCASS describes parental alienation as “undoubtedly a form of neglect or child abuse”.

Allegations of parental alienation should be taken seriously. It is commonly recognised that exposing children to alienating behaviours can be emotionally harmful to them. The overriding view is that it is in the child’s best interests to have an ongoing relationship with both parents. At the heart of every decision made by the Family Court is what course of action is in the best interests of the child.

Another twist in the Gruffudd and Evans case is that their daughter, aged 13, filed a restraining order against her father. Mr Gruffudd has blamed this application on Ms Evans and has also claimed that she has prevented the children from attending counselling.

Ms Evan’s has denied the allegation and stated in court papers that Mr Gruffudd ‘has not seen, complied with, nor called the children for 11 weeks’.

Interestingly, Ms Evans stands opposed to her and the children being subject to such court proceedings if such evaluation is based on speculation and suspicions.

Clearly this looks set to be a heavily disputed set of proceedings in which both parties will need put their case to the court.

Sadly, as can often be the case with child arrangement disputes, the children can get be caught in the middle; in this case they might know a lot more about these proceedings because of their famous parents and the fact that this is playing out in public.

If you are experiencing any of the above, then it is important you instruct a lawyer who is a specialist in such matters. It could be the case that your child holds strong views of their own but may have been coached into believing other views. This would need careful exploration in the family court, and it is important that time is not lost in the process, so early advice is recommended.

Will Britney Spears be protected by prenup in third divorce?

Posted on 17th August 2023 by McAlister Family Law

I’m getting divorced, do I have to go to Court?

News of Britney Spears’ pending divorce from her third husband, Sam Asghari, has been widely reported in the press. Sadly, only a year after their wedding, their marriage appears to be over, with Sam filing for divorce in Los Angeles. Here, McAlister Family Law’s Divorce and Finance Partner, Fiona Wood, looks at the divorce application and questions if Britney’s prenup will protect her.

It is understood that Sam has asked the court to provide him with “spousal support”, which is maintenance from Britney to meet Sam’s income needs whilst they sort out their divorce, and for her to provide him with money to pay his legal fees.

These applications made by Sam to the US court are the equivalent of making an application for interim maintenance and for a Legal Services Payment Order in England. If one spouse cannot meet their reasonable income needs during the divorce and the other spouse can afford to fund these, a judge can order the wealthier spouse to pay interim maintenance to the other spouse until a financial settlement is reached in their divorce.

It is also possible in England to make an application to court that your spouse provide you with money to fund your ongoing legal fees – known as a Legal Services Payment Order. To make this application successfully you have to show that you cannot afford to fund your own legal fees, you cannot obtain a commercial loan from two lenders to fund your legal fees and that your spouse can afford to pay them.

It is reported that Britney and Sam signed a prenuptial agreement before their wedding, to protect the wealth that Britney accumulated before they married. Under Californian Law the prenuptial agreement is thought to be “ironclad”. However, there is speculation that Sam will try to renegotiate the terms of the prenuptial agreement by threatening to release embarrassing information about Britney.

The law in England regarding prenuptial agreements is different to that in other countries, but they are still an important way of protecting assets if you divorce. Here a prenuptial agreement is not automatically binding if a couple divorce. It is an important factor that the court will take into account when consider a fair financial settlement. The reported cases show that as long as both spouse’s needs can be met, the divorce court is likely to uphold the terms of their prenuptial agreement or if it does not fully uphold it, the presence of the prenuptial agreement will reduce the settlement received by one spouse from what they would have received if no prenuptial agreement had been signed.

I’m getting divorced, do I have to go to Court?

Posted on 3rd August 2023 by McAlister Family Law

I’m getting divorced, do I have to go to Court?

Separating from your spouse and getting divorced can be a very difficult and stressful experience for many reasons. You will probably have many questions. Here, Weronika Husejko takes a closer look at one of our most frequently asked questions by those about to go through the divorce process – do I have to go to Court?

In terms of the divorce itself, it is very rare that you will have to attend Court. The new ‘no fault’ divorce procedure does not allow for your spouse to dispute the divorce generally, unless they do not agree that the Court has jurisdiction or that the marriage was valid. This was not the case previously.

Prior to the no fault divorce procedure, the spouse applying for the divorce could apply for a Costs Order against the other spouse, effectively asking the Court that an Order is made that they pay all of their divorce costs. This was another reason for dispute in the past. However, the Court will now only make Costs Orders in divorce proceedings in very rare circumstances. As a result, there are now fewer opportunities for dispute in divorce proceedings, which significantly reduces the chance of any Court attendance.

When you are going through a divorce, the financial element is usually dealt with separately. Many couples are able to negotiate and reach a financial settlement outside of the Court arena e.g. via solicitors, mediation or between themselves. This would usually mean that you do not have to attend Court, unless you are already in Court proceedings at the time that you reach the agreement. When a financial settlement is reached in this way, a Consent Order reflecting your agreement can be submitted to the Court alongside a form which summarises your respective financial positions. The Court will usually consider this type of application on paper in the couple’s absence. They may request that the couple attend Court in rare circumstances, for example, if they have serious concerns regarding the proposed division of the assets.

If one spouse makes an application to the Court for a financial remedy order, (this is an application asking the court to deal with the financial aspects of their divorce), this may result in both spouses having to attend Court. This is the most common reason for Court attendance generally within a divorce. This is because when financial remedy Court proceedings are issued, the case will automatically be listed for a ‘First Appointment’. This is an administrative hearing. However, more frequently these days, the need for this type of hearing is circumvented by the spouses agreeing the ‘directions’ which are needed to move the case forward e.g. the instruction of a surveyor to value a property.

The second hearing is the ‘Financial Dispute Resolution Appointment’. This is a negotiation hearing whereby both spouses will usually attend Court with their legal representatives. If the spouses do not reach an agreement at this hearing, the case will be listed for a ‘Final Hearing’, whereby they will have to attend Court to give evidence. However, this is less common as most cases settle at the negotiation hearing.

The short answer is that you do not necessarily have to attend Court in order to get a divorce. Whilst it is not always possible to avoid Court proceedings, divorcing couples are generally encouraged to try to reach an agreement outside of the Court arena. The best outcome in a divorce is arguably a financial settlement which the couple have agreed, as opposed to a decision which has been imposed upon them by a Judge.

Should we open a joint account?

Posted on 22nd June 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Should we open a joint account?

There are lots of decisions to make during a relationship and perhaps even more so when parties begin cohabiting. One of the questions which sometimes comes up is whether or not you should have a joint bank account with your partner? Here, Lisa Brown looks at what a joint account means from the perspective of couples, the bank, and family law.

This is obviously a personal decision and can vary between couples. It can be helpful from a practical point of view if you have a lot of joint expenditure, but it would be sensible to agree some ground rules about usage and how much each party is expected to contribute from the outset.

From the bank’s perspective, for example, if one party were to run up a large overdraft on a joint account, they would still generally consider that to a joint liability. Similarly, from a family law point of view if a cohabiting couple are separating the starting point would be that assets are divided as they are held legally so any savings in a joint account should be shared equally, and any joint borrowing should be borne equally.

To have some clarity between you, it might be sensible to have a cohabitation agreement which can deal with how any assets would be divided on separation (including any joint accounts) and also, if you wish, how outgoings will be met during the relationship.

These agreements are not currently 100% binding, but they are very useful and are becoming more and more popular.

What about if you are married?

Lots of married couples have joint accounts but it is not a pre-requisite, and some choose not to.

Back in February Chloe Madeley hit the headlines when she revealed that she went back to work 8 weeks after giving birth citing the fact that she doesn’t have a joint account with her husband, James Haskell (and presumably that in effect they both financially support themselves).

Whilst obviously it is for every individual couple to decide on their own financial arrangements during their relationship this statement does give the impression that simply because there is no joint account there is no financial links or accountability between Chloe and James.

This is not the case for married couples or those in civil partnerships. The legal starting point is quite different to couples who simply live together. When you enter into a marriage or civil partnership you immediately gain the ability to make a wide range of financial claims against your partner (and likewise they have those claims against you).

If your marriage or civil partnership were to come to an end and you cannot agree how assets should be divided, then the court has the power to divide them between you in line with the factors set out in Section 25 Matrimonial Causes Act. These factors include (amongst other things) the assets and income of each party, length of the relationship and the contributions you have each made.

The court is not bound to consider monies in a joint account joint nor monies in one person’s sole name as money to be retained solely by them.

There can, however, be circumstances where it is relevant where monies have been held. For example, if one party had received an inheritance the court may be more minded to exclude that from any settlement if it had always been kept separate in a sole account.

If you or somebody you know wants to understand their legal position better whether they are cohabiting, thinking about cohabiting, engaged or married they should contact one of our specialist family lawyers today.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning forced marriage, please get in touch with our team at hello@mcalisterfamilylaw.co.uk

Transparency in the Family Courts – the Dawn of a ‘New Norm’

Posted on 1st June 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Transparency in the Family Courts – the Dawn of a ‘New Norm’

Should the media report on the Family Courts? Here, Ruth Hetherington looks at the role of transparency in the family courts and how transparency orders will protect those families already under a lot of stress.

For many years now, on the whole, the Family Courts sit in private, which means no one else is allowed into the Court hearing except those people involved. Some would say that there is a shroud of secrecy in the Family Courts and decisions are being made behind closed doors. There has been a genuine reason for this … there is a need to protect the privacy of the people involved, particularly children balanced with having the public’s perception, trust and confidence about the way in which the family courts operate.

At present S.12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 prevents reporting of most family law cases in the absence of the Judges consent. This legislation was intended to ‘protect and support the administration of justice’.

S.97 Children Act 1989 protects the identity of children. It is a criminal offence if breached.

As it can be seen, currently there is little scope for reporting on any family case.

It would be fair to say that most family cases have been held in private, but the public only get to hear about ‘big money’ cases and predominantly the lives of celebrities when they hit the headlines.

The appetite however for the family courts to be more accessible has been a matter of discussion and debate for many years. The President of the Family Law Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane intends to change all of that.

Sir Andrew McFarlane published a report in October 2021 entitled ‘Confidence and Confidentiality: Transparency in the Family Courts’.

The emphasis now is very much that the veil of secrecy and mystery associated with the family courts needs to be lifted, mainly to provide the public with confidence that the family courts are safeguarding children and their families.

Sir Andrew McFarlane says ‘the time has come for accredited media representatives to be able to not only attend hearings but to report publicly on what they see and hear. Any reporting must however be subject to very clear rules to maintain anonymity of children and families and to keep confidential intimate details of their private lives.

Pilots are now running in Cardiff, Leeds and Carlisle, and they will continue throughout 2023 with data being collated. In essence accredited media representatives and legal bloggers are permitted to attend court hearings, have access to documents and report on the outcome, subject to the terms of a Transparency Order.

Transparency orders will set out what can and cannot be reported on. Reporters must and will be bound by that order. The Transparency Order can be varied or removed at any point, by the Court.

The case needs to be conducted in an orderly way and not be prejudiced or compromised. However, how this operates in practice forms part of the Pilot now running.

The pilot will start with public law cases (care proceedings) then private law children proceedings.

The jury is still out, as many family practitioners, are apprehensive of the changes as all families going through the family court are already experiencing stress and anxiety without having to deal with an added layer that their case could be reported on. It may prevent or deter many vulnerable people in seeking access to justice at a time in their lives where help and support is needed.

The message is clear, confidence and confidentiality can be achieved and that there needs to be a major shift in culture.

Legal bloggers

Interesting concept and development within the Pilot in that anyone can ‘blog’ on the law, but can they just attend a hearing? The answer is no. To be able to attend court hearings you must be a ‘duly authorised lawyer’. Blogging can only be for journalistic research or public, legal educational purposes. So…in the busy lives of family practitioners do they have time to attend other court hearings that they are not involved in, would they want to, could this be part of training for young lawyers entering the early part of their career. It remans to be some as to whether there is the ‘up take’ on legal bloggers.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce or family law, please get in touch with our team at McAlister Family Law.

Breach of child arrangements order – What are my options?

Posted on 4th May 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Breach of child arrangements order – What are my options?

Navigating decisions about arrangements for the children, house rules and holidays can be a very difficult task for separated parents. In cases where an impasse is irreconcilable, it may be necessary to secure a Child Arrangements Order to clarify matters and enable the parties to move on with their lives. Here, Agata Napora looks at the consequences if Court Orders aren’t followed.

Initial Steps

A constant breach can be very upsetting and cause a lot of uncertainty for the other parent and the child concerned which is far from desirable and should be handled with care. In first instance we would recommend that you always try to address all the issues direct as this may help break the ice between you and help resolve matters without the need of engaging a solicitor or taking your case back Court. However, should this approach be unsuccessful, the next step would be to contact a solicitor with a view to writing to the other party and reminding them of their obligation to comply with the Order and the legal ramifications if they continue to breach it.

A Child Arrangements Order has a “Warning Notice” attached to it which informs the parties about the consequences of failure to abide by the terms of the Order. From a legal standpoint, a breach of a Court Order is a serious affair as it constitutes a contempt of Court, and this may lead to sanctions being made against the non-compliant parent.

If correspondence from a solicitor does not achieve the desired effect and the other parent continues to act contrary to the terms of the Order, then you may need to consider applying to the Court for enforcement.

What Constitutes a Breach of an Order

When a Child Arrangements Order is already in place almost anything can amount to a breach including a lateness to the handover or a cancellation of contact due to an illness, or a prior work commitment. Whilst a one-off incident of this nature is unlikely to be enough for the Court to order a sanction against the other party, a series of minor breaches may have a profound impact on the welfare of the child and the Court will therefore take a closer look at the overall situation. It is therefore advisable to keep a record of all the instances and the frequency of the said breaches so that the Court can benefit from a full picture and is able to investigate the issues accordingly.

What the Court looks for in enforcement applications

The Court will determine the nature of the breach and look at the reasons behind the other parent’s non-compliance. The Judge will be interested in knowing as to whether there is a plausible explanation behind the other parent’s conduct or perhaps no valid justification at all. The Court will assess the effect of the breach on the child’s welfare and whether it would be in the child’s best interests for the order to be enforced. Every case is different, and in some circumstances, the Court may wish to obtain expert advice or a CAFCASS report or make a referral to social services to investigate matters in more detail before making a final determination.

How to make Enforcement application

An application to enforce a court order is made on a specific enforcement application form C79. There is also a Court fee payable of £232 unless you qualify for a fee remission. We would recommend that you seek legal advice on how to complete the form to ensure that your application is successful.

Enforcement and Sanctions

In deciding whether to enforce the Order, the Court must satisfy itself beyond reasonable doubt that such action is necessary and proportionate to the seriousness and frequency of the parent committing the breach and that the Enforcement Order is required to secure compliance with the Order. If the breach turns out to be minor or the parent in breach of the Order actively shows remorse and perhaps undertakes to the Court not to repeat the said misconduct, the Court is likely to consider that Enforcement Order is not necessary. Furthermore, if a parent in breach of the Order can show on balance of probabilities that they had a reasonable excuse for failing to comply with the order, then it an Enforcement Order will not be granted.

Whilst some parties may be referred to a separated parents information program (SPIP) or mediation to resolve their disputes, others could be ordered to pay a fine, undertake unpaid work or be committed to prison. It may also be possible for one parent to seek a compensation for financial loss suffered by reason of the breach.

Who pays costs of enforcement proceedings

The standard rule on costs in children proceedings is that there should be no order for costs. This approach however does not apply to applications for enforcement orders meaning that the applicant party have the right to seek costs against the respondent party and the Court has a discretion to order the unsuccessful party to pay the reasonable legal costs of the other side.

If you are considering applying to the Court for enforcement of the existing Child Arrangements Order, we would highly recommend that you seek specialist assistance.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce or family law, please get in touch with our team at McAlister Family Law.

Means free Legal Aid being extended

Posted on 18th April 202318th April 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Means free Legal Aid being extended

Government announces extension to the rules for family legal aid. The scope of means free Legal Aid is being extended for Parents and those with Parental Responsibility. This applies to opposing applications for Placement and Adoption Orders in public family law proceedings. Here, Clint Nicholls looks at what this means for you.

Well, it will be a relief for many Parents as it will make it easier to obtain Legal Aid as the case will only be assessed on a merits basis, whereas previously applications were subject to the means test. Challenging an adoption or Placement Order is a daunting task especially for vulnerable Parents who may have little support if they cannot obtain legal help. If Parents can demonstrate that they have made changes and these changes are sufficient, then their case will be assessed on merits only and they will not have the added worry of their financial circumstances barring them from accessing legal help. This is a positive step from the Legal Aid Agency and should be welcomed and hopefully further steps can be made to allow more people to access legal services without having to worry about their financial means.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce or family law, please get in touch with our team at McAlister Family Law.

Noel Gallagher and Sara MacDonald to divorce after 22 years – Does the length of marriage matter?

Posted on 16th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Noel Gallagher and Sara MacDonald to divorce after 22 years – Does the length of marriage matter?

Noel Gallagher, Manchester born former Oasis member, and his wife, Sara MacDonald have announced that they are to divorce following a marriage of 22 years. Here Weronika Husejko looks at how the length of a marriage can impact divorce proceedings.

The former couple married in 2011, having begun their relationship in 2001. They have two children together, Donovan, aged 15 and Sonny aged 12, both of whom are still dependent.

It is a commonly queried whether the length of a marriage has any relevance within a divorce financial settlement. The short answer to this question would be yes.

When a Judge considers a financial settlement, they must consider section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Section 25, amongst other things, specifies that a Judge must in particular have regard to the duration of the couples’ marriage.

What does this mean in practice?

Generally speaking, a marriage usually falls into one of three brackets, that being either a short term, medium term or long term marriage.

A short term marriage would usually be considered to be one of up to 5 years. It should be noted however that a couple cannot divorce until they have been married for a minimum of 1 year. It is more likely that the financial settlement in a short term marriage will take into consideration pre acquired assets. A “clean break” may be considered to be more appropriate in these circumstances. However, this may not always be the case, especially if there are dependent children involved, in which case the focus would be on ensuring that the children’s needs are met.

A medium term marriage would generally be viewed as around 10 years.

Noel and Sara’s marriage would most likely be considered to be a long marriage on the basis that they began living together around 2001, their marriage being a total of 22 years. This is because a period of cohabitation that moves seamlessly into marriage will also be taken into account by the Courts, when considering the length of the marriage.

A longer marriage of this nature can often be more complex when it comes to the financial settlement. The Courts may take a different approach when dividing matrimonial assets in this type of case, compared to that of a short or medium term marriage. By way of example, it is far less likely for the Court to consider Noel and Sara’s respective contributions to the marriage. As a result, it may be that there will be an equal division of assets, unless it is necessary to move away from a 50-50 split to meet the need of one of the spouses.

It may be that Noel and Sara have a pre nuptial agreement, in which case this may be taken into consideration by the Courts, and therefore may have an impact upon the overall financial settlement.

In any event, the Court’s primary interest in their case will be in ensuring that the needs of both Donovan and Sonny are met.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce issues, please get in touch with our private child team at McAlister Family Law.

Media and the family court – Do the public need to know what’s happening?

Posted on 5th December 2022 by McAlister Family Law

Media and the family court – Do the public need to know what’s happening?

For the first time, under a twelve-month pilot scheme running from January 2023 – January 2024, journalists may be able to report on what happens in family courts in 3 selected areas of the UK Cardiff, Leeds and Carlisle. In his latest blog post, Jack Tonge looks at the law now and what the pilot scheme may offer.

Current UK law forbids anything that happens in a family court from being reported unless a judge explicitly makes an order allowing it.

The rationale for keeping family court hearings behind closed doors is so that children’s rights to privacy are protected.

Under the pilot scheme journalists may report on what they witness within the family court arena, subject to ‘the principles of protection of the anonymity of any children involved unless the Judge orders otherwise’. Families can also be interviewed in respect of their cases so long as their anonymity is protected.

Under the pilot scheme journalists may be able to name local authorities, the lawyers involved, as well as experts appointed by the Court. However, unless ordered by the court, individual social workers will remain anonymous as with the identities of medical professionals treating children or any family member within the case.

It is important to note that the Articles of the ECHR still play an important part in governing the Court’s discretion. The Court is still under a duty to ensure the rights of the family and parties remain intact such has having a right to a fair trial (Article 6), whilst balancing the rights to a private and family life (Article 8) and the rights of the press, public and parties (Article 10). Therefore, the Court may depart from the transparency principle should the case deem it necessary.

Whilst it remains to be seen whether the pilot will bring an end to the often criticised ‘secrecy’ of the family court arena; it is clear that the Transparency Reporting Pilot is the start of implementing changes to impact the same.

If you are affected by any of the issues raised here, please get in touch today. We are here to help.