Practice Directions

1. This Direction applies only to cases proceeding in the Family Division of the High Court at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

1.1 In order to achieve as much judicial continuity as possible in the hearing of cases and to avoid delay, the procedure described in this direction will apply as from the 9th April 2002: -

2. Applications within Part IV (Care and Supervision) of the Children Act 1989
cease to have effect in respect of applications made on or after 1st November 2003 (President’s Direction 29th July 2003)

3 Urgent Applications Court

3.1 Cases which have been allocated to a judge will not be taken by the Urgent Applications Court except to deal with an emergency. When the Allocated Judge is not in London, it will nevertheless usually be possible to communicate with the judge by telephone or by fax (or e-mail) in order to obtain directions or release of the case. A video conference may sometimes be appropriate.

4 Applications within Part II of the Children Act 1989

4.1 These cases (i.e. private law children cases) when commenced in or transferred to the High Court will not formally come within this direction except that judicial continuity will be observed whenever possible. The aim will be for the same judge to deal with the directions and other interlocutory hearings as well as the final hearing.

5 Ancillary Relief applications within matrimonial causes and applications for financial provision under the Children Act 1989

5.1 These applications when transferred to (or commenced in) the High Court will not formally come within this direction except that judicial continuity will be observed whenever possible, in particular in very complex cases and in cases where there are very substantial assets.

5.2 The above is subject to the requirement in rule 2.61E of the Family Proceedings Rules 1991 in relation to the judge before whom any Financial Dispute Resolution hearing takes place.

5.3 In cases which are suitable for adjudication in the High Court by a High Court Judge and in cases in which it would be appropriate for the first appointment to be listed before a judge, for example because of the likelihood of substantial dispute about the extent of financial disclosure or the desirability of using the first appointment as an FDR, it may be appropriate for the application for transfer to be made at an early stage of the proceedings, before the date initially given for the first appointment.

6 cease to have effect in respect of applications made on or after 1st November 2003 (President’s Direction 29th July 2003)

Elizabeth Butler-Sloss
President