The government's decision to ditch a proposal to ban naming the third party in adultery cases is a missed opportunity, according to family lawyers.


Following a consultation on modernising the family procedure rules, the Ministry of Justice this week outlined its programme for reform.



It will go ahead with plans to replace archaic terms with easier language and introduce a single code for family proceedings.



But it has watered down a proposal to ban the naming of a co-respondent in divorce cases where adultery is alleged. Instead of an absolute ban, there will be a practice direction to provide a stronger barrier against naming the adulterer's partner.



Where the applicant does name the third party, that person will be made a party to the proceedings automatically, so they can rebut the allegations made against them.



Resolution chairwoman Jane McCulloch said it was a shame the government had not been 'brave enough to grasp the nettle to carry out a thorough review'.



Christina Blacklaws, founder of London firm Blacklaws Davis, said she could see no benefit in naming co-respondents.



Catherine Baksi