Report comment

Laudable , I would fully support any cost-effective and fair changes to relieve the burden upon an over-stretched and under-resourced family justice system which do not diminish access to justice.

Would the technical and procedural "divorce" of proceedings relating to the marriage or civil partnership from financial remedies relating thereto raise a technical procedural issue in that if the former were dealt with by the family court or a divorce court sub-branch thereof and the latter by a "financial remedies [family] court" would the two in practice communicate with each other so as to ensure that no final financial order was made until on or before decree nisi and did not take effect until decree absolute/final order in the main suit?

It seem to me as though what is being considered is something analogous to the money claim online option for simple debts but whether this is appropriate to a non-money claim which is, whatever the procedure, a personal matter for both parties is and it may be the slippery slope to parties simply being able to obtain divorce at a cashpoint machine as they apparently can do in some US states.

So do we wish to diminish the termination of the institution of marriage or CP?

I also wonder, again with respect, whether the proliferation of sub-courts with the family court system, e.g.. say divorce, financial remedies, children (private law),Children (public law),Children (abduction)IHA claims, TLATA claims, cohabitation claims, miscellaneous family claims ( e.g. Schedule 1 CA 1989) is just going to increase costs to and confusion amongst, litigants who are often in person.

I can see the case for rolling out the successful drug/alcohol issue courts from London to the provinces however.