This document provides general guidance regarding civil partnership dissolution procedure. Your family lawyer will be able to provide specific advice based on your circumstances. No fault dissolution The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 (DDSA 2020) has been described as a landmark reform of the law relating to divorce and dissolution. It aims to make the dissolution process less acrimonious by introducing what is commonly known as a ‘no fault’ procedure. This legislation, for the first time, completely removed the need to assign blame when commencing dissolution proceedings. Historically, in order to obtain a dissolution of a civil partnership in England and Wales it was necessary for the party applying for a dissolution to establish that the civil partnership had broken down irretrievably and to do that they had to prove one of the ‘four facts’. Two facts were based on fault, ie unreasonable behaviour and desertion, and two facts were based on a period of separation (two years’ separation with consent or five years’ separation without consent). In many cases one of the parties

Pensions analysis: The Pensions Ombudsman has rejected a complaint about the payment of death benefits from a pension scheme. Martin Scott of gunnercooke LLP looks at the decision.

Civil procedure refers to the rules and processes governing how civil court cases are started, managed, heard and concluded, including appeals and enforcement of judgments. It covers matters such as issue and service of proceedings, statements of case or pleadings, disclosure, evidence, interim applications, trials, costs and case management.In England and Wales, civil procedure is primarily governed by the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR) and accompanying Practice Directions, supplemented by case law on issues such as proportionality, relief from sanctions and abuse of process. In Northern Ireland, the Rules of the Court of Judicature and County Court Rules fulfil a similar role. In Ireland, civil procedure is set out mainly in the Rules of the Superior Courts, Circuit Court Rules and District Court Rules. Scotland uses distinct terminology and structure, with civil procedure governed by the Rules of the Court of Session, Sheriff Court Rules and related Acts of Sederunt.Across all four jurisdictions, civil procedure is central to litigation strategy, compliance, costs control and access to justice, ensuring that civil disputes are resolved fairly, efficiently and in accordance with due process.

Planning analysis: This Court of Appeal decision summarises, and endorses, the recent approach to filing and serving claim forms in statutory reviews (and appeals), where either the sealed claim form has been served late, or an application to extend time for service has been made late, or both. The court again emphasised the importance of adhering to time limits, underlined the strictness of the rules in this regard, reiterated the high threshold required before extensions of time will be granted, and overturned the first instance judge’s decision to extend time and permit the claim to proceed, even though some criticism lay at the door of the court administrative section in not issuing the claims swiftly. This decision is a must-read for anyone involved in conducting statutory appeals and reviews in planning (and other) cases: it provides a clear set of principles for filing and serving in time, and for making an application to extend time where required. Written by Josef Cannon, Kings Counsel at Cornerstone Barristers.

Dispute Resolution analysis: The Court of Appeal has given a robust reminder of the challenges facing a party who seeks to appeal against findings of primary fact. Written by Andrew Butler QC, barrister at Tanfield Chambers, London.

This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: Civil restraint orders, Limited civil restraint orders, Extended civil restraint orders and General civil restraint orders. What is a civil proceedings order and when will a court order one? Section 42 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981) gives the court certain powers to restrict vexatious legal proceedings if certain criteria are satisfied. Where an individual repeatedly brings unmeritorious claims and/or court applications against the same or different parties, the Attorney General, in the exercise of its public interest function, can apply to the court for an order pursuant to SCA 1981, s 42 which prevents a vexatious litigant from bringing further civil proceedings without leave of the High Court. This is called a ‘civil proceedings order’ (CPO). The High Court also has the power under SCA 1981, s 42 to make a 'criminal proceedings order' or an 'all proceedings order'. As the names suggest, a CPO restricts the issue of civil proceedings, a criminal proceedings order restricts the issue of criminal proceedings

The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (PCA 2002), s 341 defines a 'civil recovery investigation' as one into: whether property is recoverable property or associated property; who holds the property; or its extent or whereabouts.

Civil recovery of property, which represents criminal property derived from unlawful conduct Civil recovery is the name given to the powers under Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002) to freeze and obtain an order for recovery of property, which represents criminal property derived from unlawful conduct. This Practice Note is concerned with the powers to make civil recovery orders (CROs), property freezing orders (PFOs) and interim receiving orders (IROs). The specific provisions relating to Scotland and Northern Ireland are beyond the scope of this Practice Note. For information about recovering property in criminal proceedings, see Practice Note: Confiscation under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. Various investigative powers exist under POCA 2002, which can be exercised by an appropriate officer in the context of a civil recovery investigation. These include the ability to obtain: • a production order under POCA 2002, s 345, see Practice Note: Production orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 • a search and seizure warrant under POCA 2002, s 352, see Practice

Procedural Rules This Practice Note covers the process and procedure for making and resisting applications for a civil recovery order (CRO), a property freezing order (PFO) or an interim receiving order (IRO) in the High Court. For further information on these orders and the basis on which they can be obtained, see Practice Note: Civil recovery orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The applicable procedure is set out in the following documents: • Practice Direction—Civil Recovery Proceedings • Senior Master Practice Note 15 April 2016: POCA Civil Recovery Claims under CPR Part 8, Civil Recovery Proceedings Practice Direction: Civil Court News—CCN 2 (13) Applications for PFOs or IROs (interim orders) must be made to the Administrative Court of the High Court. A claim for a CRO must be started in the Central Office of the King’s Bench Division (KBD). If a CRO application follows the applications for the interim orders, the interim order applications will be transferred to the KBD by the Administrative Court. There is no limitation on the power of the High Court

This Practice Note explains the process for the civil recovery of property outside the UK under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002), including when a civil recovery order can be made for property which is abroad and when requests for assistance or evidence can be made to the Secretary of State to send to foreign governments. Civil recovery of property abroad under POCA 2002 A civil recovery order in Chapter 2 under POCA 2002, Pt 5 can only be made in respect of property outside the UK (or outside the relevant part of the UK) if there is or has been a connection between the case and the relevant part of the UK. For orders made in the High Court, the relevant part of the UK is England and Wales. ‘A connection’ between the case and the relevant part of the UK exists in the following situations: • the unlawful conduct occurred entirely or partly in the relevant part of the UK • the property in question has been in the relevant part of the UK, but only

This Practice Note deals with general information on civil restraint orders (CROs) that is common to all types of CRO and should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: • Limited civil restraint orders • Extended civil restraint orders • General civil restraint orders What is a civil restraint order (CRO)? CROs limit a party’s ability to make certain claims or applications in specified proceedings, without first seeking permission from the court. They are granted to prevent a party from issuing claims or making applications which are without merit, where that party has demonstrated a persistent history of doing so. There are three different types of CRO as defined in CPR 2.3: • a limited civil restraint order (LCRO) pursuant to CPR PD 3C, paras 2.1 and 2.2, which restrains a party from making any further applications in current proceedings—see Practice Note: Limited civil restraint orders • an extended civil restraint order (ECRO) pursuant to CPR PD 3C, paras 3.1 and 3.2, which restrains a party from issuing certain claims or making certain applications in specified courts—see

This Practice Note explains what a civil restraint order (CRO) is and the circumstances in which the court can make one under Family Procedure Rules 2010, (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 4.8 and FPR 2010, PD 4B. In particular it looks at general civil restraint orders (GCROs) including who can apply for one, their effect and their duration (including how they can be extended/continued). It also looks at issues affecting the party who is subject to the GCRO including applying for permission to amend or discharge the GCRO and the consequences of breaching a GCRO. Civil restraint orders in family proceedings The purpose of a CRO is not to prohibit access to the courts but to protect the court’s process from abuse by acting as a filter for relevant applications made by litigants subject to a CRO. In summary, applications that fall within the scope of an existing CRO are subject to review by a judge specified in the order before they can proceed. The court can make one of three types of CRO against a party that has