‘A High Court judge has allowed a McKenzie Friend to exercise rights of audience in supporting a defendant facing an order that could lead to a jail sentence for contempt being activated.’
Legal Futures, 27th June 2024
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘Katrina McCarthy was apparently acting as a McKenzie Friend for a Notting Hill Genesis tenant. Notting Hill assert that in the course of “assisting” the tenant, Katrina McCarthy “induced the tenant to start paying his rent directly into her own bank account. She had represented to the tenant that she would then transfer the funds into a “court rent account” so that he could “offset” his rent whilst a disrepair dispute with Notting Hill was resolved.” ‘
Nearly Legal, 9th August 2023
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
‘In Park v Hadi and Another [2022] EWCA Civ 581, the Court of Appeal (Holroyde, Stuart-Smith and Warby LJJ), reaffirmed the principle that a judge may, of her own discretion, grant relief from sanctions without formal notice or without any application at all. The Court went on to issue guidance as to how this judicial discretion ought to be exercised, observing that a judge should always act in accordance with the overriding objective and will likely only exercise her discretion to grant relief sparingly.’
Farrar's Building, 5th May 2022
Source: www.farrarsbuilding.co.uk
‘A disputed adoption case has highlighted the problems of reliance on a Mackenzie Friend rather than a solicitor in proceedings, a Family Division judge has suggested.’
Local Government Lawyer, 22nd October 2021
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The recent case of Ameyaw v McGoldrick [2020] EWHC 1741 (QB) offers a cautionary tale about McKenzie Friends and what they can and can’t do for you in court. In this case the judge, Mrs Justice Steyn, refused to allow the MF to make oral submissions on behalf of the claimant, saying the claimant was a well-educated intelligent woman who had extensive experience of litigation, and was perfectly capable of speaking for herself.’
Transparency Project, 5th July 2020
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘McKenzie Friends are giving “biased and misleading” advice to vulnerable family litigants, an academic study of online posts has found.’
Legal Futures, 11th December 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A new breed of untrained legal advocates who are ripping off the public with “flawed” and “dangerous” legal advice should be banned, lawyers’ leaders and politicians have urged ministers.’
Daily Telegraph, 8th December 2019
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘A man who ran a ‘litigation firm’ and sold its expertise as coming from qualified legal advisers – even though it did not – has been held to the same standards as actual lawyers in a negligence claim.’
Legal Futures, 18th March 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘While “deeply concerned” about the growth in fee-charging McKenzie Friends, the judiciary has failed to decide whether they should be banned – three years after consulting on doing just that.’
Legal Futures, 26th February 2019
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A new research project will examine whether vulnerable people representing themselves in child court cases find themselves and their children put at risk by misinformed or biased online legal advice.’
Family Law, 18th October 2018
Source: www.familylaw.co.uk
‘In February 2016, the then Lord Chief Justice, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, and the Judicial Executive Board issued a consultation entitled “Reforming the courts’ approach to McKenzie Friends”. It followed an internal report by a judicial working group and sought responses to a number of proposals in relation to McKenzie Friends, including changing their name to ‘court supporter’, replacing existing practice guidance with rules of court, introducing a Code of Conduct for them, and imposing a bar on recovery of fees.’
Transparency Project, 27th February 2018
Source: www.transparencyproject.org.uk
‘A district judge has explained how he had to throw a McKenzie Friend out of his court after she disrupted proceedings and threatened complaints against him and the other side’s solicitors.’
Legal Futures, 21st September 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘HM Judiciary is set to reassess some of its proposals for regulating the fast-expanding “McKenzie friend” sector after a consultation on banning fee recovery received “large numbers of responses”.’
Law Society's Gazette, 15th September 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Most litigants in person were happy with their experience of paid McKenzie Friends, according to research published this week. The study commissioned by the Bar Council found that unrepresented litigants reported ‘relatively low’ costs for such services.’
Legal Voice, 13th June 2017
Source: www.legalvoice.org.uk
‘ New research undertaken by the Universities of Cardiff and Bristol shows that the bulk of work undertaken by paid McKenzie Friends is delivered outside court, with very few seeking actively to represent their litigant in person clients in the court room.’
The Bar council, 12th June 2017
Source: www.barcouncil.org.uk
‘A Court of Appeal judgment that discouraged use of the term ‘McKenzie friend’ and described the bad experiences that some court users have had with unqualified advisers has met mixed views from the profession.’
Law Society's Gazette, 26th May 2017
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘‘Professional’ paid McKenzie Friends associated with fathers’ rights groups (FRGs) play on their “uncertainty and sense of victimhood” to attract business, academic research has found, saying that there needed to be a code of conduct and a greater role for law school clinics in their place.’
Legal Futures, 20th April 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024