Important Developments In UK Family Law

THERE HAVE BEEN 3 IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENTS IN FAMILY LAW OF WHICH

YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS SHOULD BE AWARE.

1 OPENING UP TO THE PRESS

The Justice Minister, Jack Straw, has now introduced the long

awaited opening up of the Family Courts to the press. This came

into effect on 27 April 2009. This is truly ground breaking as the

press will have access to all levels of Family Courts including

those cases which had previously been heard "in private"

or "in camera". This covers all financial cases as well

as disputes involving children.

However, it should be noted that only representatives of the

media who hold a UK press card, and not the public at large, will

be entitled to attend. Furthermore, any Judge hearing a case has

the ability to restrict the press access particularly if the Judge

rules that it is not in the interests of any child involved in the

proceedings, somebody's safety is at risk or justice will

otherwise be impeded or prejudiced.

A Judge also has the power to restrict reporting where

appropriate, while names and specific details of cases cannot be

reported in any cases. The press can only report on the process and

procedures and must keep to generalised comment. Some commentators

believe only high profile or celebrity cases will be of interest to

the press; others have said that some disaffected husband or wife

may try to use the press intrusion card as a "blackmail"

weapon to obtain a better settlement. What is certain is that

family lawyers and other professional advisers must advise clients

at the outset of any family law case that their case and personal

life details might be the subject of press reporting or comment.

This is a further factor for the family law client to consider in

deciding what action he or she wants to take and the process he or

she wants to follow.

We are all waiting to see how this will pan out in practice.

2 RE-OPENING SETTLEMENTS OR ORDERS BECAUSE THE FINANCIAL

MARKETS HAVE COLLAPSED

As has been widely reported in the press recently, the Court of

Appeal, in the case of Myerson, rejected the husband's argument

to try and put the clock back and revise a Consent Order. This had

previously been made when his wealth (on paper) was very

substantially greater than it is now as a result of the collapse in

the value of his company's shares. Mrs Myerson was allowed to

retain her part of the capital award already received of

approximately £7m even though on today's valuations and

figures, her husband argued that he...