McKenzie friends and litigants in person

Litigants in person

Following cuts to the availability of legal aid in family proceedings made by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, the number of litigants in person has increased. A litigant in person has the same right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as a litigant who is legally represented and is entitled to expect the courts to take positive steps to ensure that their ECHR, art 6 rights are met. Where a litigant in person represents themselves and exercises their own right of audience, the court may actively to assist that person to clarify their case. However, the court must be careful not to provide assistance to a litigant in person in such a way as to infringe the ECHR, art 6 rights of any other party.

Findings in a Ministry of Justice report on litigants in person included that the majority of litigants in person in the study's sample were in person because they were ineligible for, or had been unable to obtain, legal aid, but could not afford legal

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Family News

Cafcass guidance on conflicting assessments in public law cases

The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) has published new guidance for local authorities and Cafcass for cases where the views of the children’s guardian (and therefore their independent advice to the court) and the assessment of a local authority social worker and/or the independent reviewing officer fundamentally differ on the final care plan or interim arrangements for a child. The guidance applies to all children in care and supervision order applications under section 31 of the Children Act 1989 and deprivation of liberty applications. The guidance sets out the process that should be followed at any point during proceedings where a divergence arises and should be completed before final recommendations are submitted to court. The guidance requires that a pre-final hearing meeting be convened to identify and document the points of difference for the court. It includes suggestions for structuring the pre-final hearing meeting, a template agenda and a template for sharing the agreed rationale with the court. The guidance is not intended to be used to agree a joint position, rather to make sure that recommendations to court include a clear explanation about why the children’s guardian, the local authority social worker and/or the independent reviewing officer have reached fundamentally different positions. The explanation must set out what the points of difference are so that the judge in the case can better understand these. It remains for the court to decide what is safe and in the best interests of the child.

View Family by content type :

Popular documents