Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Printer Friendly Version
Family analysis: The President of the Family Division, Sir James Munby, has published his 17th View from the President’s Chambers setting out where we are and what needs to be done to de-link divorce from financial proceedings.
17th View from the President’s Chambers
The President of the Family Division, Sir James Munby, has issued his 17th View from the President's Chambers, as to the separation of divorce and financial proceedings. The President sets out the urgent need for a pilot of specialist financial courts, arguing that the time has come to bring about a complete separation of divorce and financial proceedings. He also suggests that the Family Court should be given a shared jurisdiction with the Chancery Division and the County Court for dealing with disputes under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 and the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996.
Why is the separation of the divorce and financial proceedings necessary?
The President sets out the reasons that drive his conclusion that the separation of divorce and financial proceedings is required:
He highlights that ancillary relief is only one of the various types of financial remedy that are dealt with in family courts—others (see the definition in the Family Procedure Rules (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 2.3) include claims under:
What steps have been taken to de-link divorce and financial proceedings?
The President refers to the administrative de-linking of financial proceedings from divorce proceedings pilot that was launched on 2 May 2017—see 'Administrative de-linking of financial proceedings from divorce proceedings to be piloted' (LNB News 02/05/2017 101). In his 17th View, the President notes that in relation to the pilot:
'Although these are early days, this seems to be going well. The next step is to move toward formal (legal) de-linking. With one exception (see below) none of the proposed ‘money’ reforms requires primary legislation: it can all be achieved by changes to the FPR, to Practice Directions and to forms.'
Will the separation of divorce and financial proceedings be delayed until 'no-fault' divorce is introduced?
In an ideal world, the President considers it would be better to delay full implementation of on-line divorce until we know what shape the reformed divorce law might take. However, in the absence of a clear decision from government on divorce law reform following the decision in Owens v Owens  EWCA Civ 182,  All ER (D) 23 (Apr), proposals to separate divorce and financial proceedings will proceed on the basis of the existing statutory regime.
What stage has the on-line divorce project reached?
On-line divorce must be more than a simple electronic version of the existing processes. The President states in his 17th View:
'The on-line divorce project has now reached the stage where, before it can sensibly move forward much further, we need to undertake a questioning and challenging look at the existing processes and procedures to identify what amendments to the FPR, forms, etc, are appropriate. In addition to the implementation of these wide-ranging reforms in relation to money claims, there is also a need to implement those of the specific, though nonetheless important, reforms proposed by the Financial Remedies Working Group which remain outstanding.'
Will there be changes to the court structure?
Building on the geographical reorganisation of the Family Court in 2014, the judicial leadership and management structures put in place for financial cases in the Central Family Court and the Family Division, and the recent changes as a result of the regionalisation of the Court of Protection, the President says that there is an urgent need to begin implementing, initially by way of pilots followed by more general roll-out, the plans for specialist financial remedies courts as first suggested by HHJ Edward Hess and Joanna Miles in November 2016 in The recognition of money work as a specialty in the family courts by the creation of a national network of Financial Remedies Units ( Fam Law 1335).
What are the next steps?
The President sets out the next steps as follows:
In addition, by the end of 2017, all necessary amendments to FPR 2010 and the relevant forms should have been agreed, ready for implementation, no later than January 2018, incorporating:
Further steps are that:
The President anticipates that this work can be completed by Spring 2018, particularly if, as may well be desirable, an expert group is tasked to produce the necessary drafts.
Does the 17th View refer to any other issues?
The President refers to the practice that has arisen of issuing applications under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 or the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 in the County Court and then inviting the district or circuit judge to sit for that purpose in the County Court, while at the same time sitting in the Family Court (often in a separate building) to deal with any related financial claims arising on divorce. The President refers to this as 'nonsense' and assumes that this point was overlooked by the draftsman of Schedule 11 to the Crime and Courts Act 2013. The solution is to amend section 25(1) of the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 and section 23(3) of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996, as recommended by Sir Michael Briggs in his Civil Courts Structure Review: Final Report in July 2016. These recommendations were rejected by government without adequate explanation and the President urges the government to reconsider.
Kirstie Gibson, solicitor in the LexisPSL Family team.
This News Analysis was first published in LexisPSL Family. Click here for a free one week trial.
0330 161 1234