‘Remote hearings have been a successful emergency measure but should not be taken as establishing a settled mode of operation for the family courts after Covid-19, a leading judge has warned.’
Legal Futures, 26th May 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Cases involving bigamy are relatively rare, and the judgment of Williams J in Padero-Mernagh v Mernagh provides a useful analysis of the relevant law in that regard. Of particular note, however, is the way in which the final hearing was dealt with remotely, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.’
Family Law, 28th May 2020
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘The Law Society has urged the President of the Family Division to issue “best practice” and “top tips” rather than full prescriptive guidance on remote hearings.’
Local Government Lawyer, 27th May 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘On May 11th the first meeting of a newly formed sub-group of the Public Law Working Group took place to review practice, guidance, regulations and the effectiveness of the law on supervision orders. Authorised by the President of the Family Division, the working party will be led by Professor Judith Harwin, Centre for Child and Family Justice, Lancaster University and Mr. Justice Keehan. It is the first review of the legislation since its enactment in the Children Act 1989.’
Family Law, 26th May 2020
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘Whether a case proceeds by remote hearing must be decided on the sometimes competing factors of the individual case. However, pushing forward to achieve remote hearings must not be at the expense of a fair and just process. The decision of the President distils a number of key principles to be borne in mind. Just because a matter can be heard remotely does not mean it must be. In this case the delay in proceedings was outweighed by the fact that the hearing could not be properly or fairly conducted without the physical presence of the mother before the judge in the courtroom. As a result of that decision, the President re-listed the matter until such time that the restrictions relating to Covid-19 are lifted.’
Park Square Barristers, 14th May 2020
Source: www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk
‘ The case deals with whether to proceed with lay evidence remotely or to adjourn part heard having heard the medical evidence over a period of 5 days via Zoom. The case concerns an application for a care order for a 4 year child. In April 2019, his two month old sister died at home. The post mortem established that his sister had sustained 65 fractures to her body as well as brain injuries. As a result the child was made the subject of an interim care order in April 2019.’
Broadway House Chambers, 14th May 2020
Source: broadwayhouse.co.uk
‘[T]here are two new remote hearing related judgments out :
A Local Authority v Mother & Ors [2020] EWHC 1086 (Fam) and Re Q [2020] EWHC 1109 (Fam).’
Transparency Project, 7th May 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘The family court has transformed in the last few weeks due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Remote court hearings were once deemed futuristic but as with other public services, the courts have had to adapt. However, in this judgment (Re P (A Child: Remote Hearing)), Sir Andrew McFarlane sent a clear message that not all hearings will be suitable for remote hearing.’
5 SAH, 6th May 2020
Source: www.5sah.co.uk
‘From the moment that the Government announced the possibility of lockdown measures being imposed, lawyers were inundated with questions about whether and how Child Arrangements Orders should be implemented over this period.’
Becket Chambers, 29th April 2020
Source: becket-chambers.co.uk
‘Children are “coming in and out of the room” during remote family law hearings and in some cases witnessing their “distressed” parents, a major study has found.’
Legal Futures, 7th May 2020
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘This case has been keenly awaited by family law practitioners, being the first appeal in a public law children case to reach the Court of Appeal on the issue of remote hearings during the COVID 19 pandemic. The appeal was heard on 22 April 2020. On the following day the same bench heard the second such appeal, Re B (Children) (Remote Hearing: Interim Care Order) [2020] EWCA (Civ) 584. There will undoubtedly be further appeals in children cases heard in the High Court or the Court of Appeal on the issue of remote hearings in the coming weeks.’
Parklane Plowden Chambers, 30th April 2020
Source: www.parklaneplowden.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has sent ministers a copy of a ruling in which he expressed concern at a “nationwide problem” of the very limited capacity in the children’s social care system for young people with complex needs who need secure care.’
Local Government Lawyer, 29th April 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal has handed down rulings in the first two appeals relating to the welfare of children to have reached the court on the issue of remote hearings during the COVID-19 pandemic.’
Local Government Lawyer, 30th April 2020
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘How effectively are people with a cognitive impairment, mental health condition and/or neuro-diverse condition able to participate in proceedings in the justice system, particularly when they engage with that system via video or telephone link?’
Transparency Project, 24th April 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘This is a serious FII case, and concerned care proceedings involving a 7 year old child. It was alleged that the mother had falsely made a number of damaging claims that her child was suffering from a myriad serious ailments and health conditions. This was all hotly disputed by the mother, so the case was fully contested. It had been fixed several months previously for a 15 days fact finding and disposal hearing before a Judge at Guildford Law Courts. Following the lockdown, the Judge had decided the case would proceed as a remote hearing using the Skype video platform.’
Garden Court Chambers, 22nd April 2020
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
‘Re P (A Child: Remote Hearing) (Rev 3) [2020] EWFC 32 is a decision of the President of the Family Division and Head of Family Justice, Sir Andrew McFarlane, about whether or not a 15 day trial should go ahead remotely. The trial was set down within care proceedings to determine very serious allegations that the mother had harmed her seven-year-old daughter by fabricating or inducing illness (known in the trade as FII).’
Transparency Project, 23rd April 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘The Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls and President of the Family Division have written to Circuit and District Judges of the Civil and Family Courts to record their appreciation for the efforts being made across all parts of the judiciary to adapt to new styles of working during the pandemic. They observe that there has been a great deal that has been learned quickly about the practical benefits and limitations of conducting hearings remotely and extensive materials and support have been shared across the legal community to facilitate such hearings being undertaken.’
Spire Barristers, 20th April 2020
Source: spirebarristers.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025