Tel: 01543 441 802  
Monday to Friday: 9am - 5pm 
(6PM for appointments only) 
Saturday: 9am - 2pm 
(For appointments only) 
It is understood that plastic screens and face masks will continue to be a requirement in courts after Covid-19 restrictions are lifted next week. 
From Monday 19 July, face coverings will continue to be worn in staffed and communal areas of court buildings, and screens and barriers will remain in place. However, while judges may decide that some form of distancing is necessary between the public and jurors in long trials, there will be ‘minimal’ social distancing in court buildings. 
The removal of restrictions could become counterproductive to efforts to beat the backlogs if members of staff are required to self-isolate, or if a jury is lost mid-trial because of a Covid contact 
At least five Nightingale courts will shut this week, despite calls from the legal profession for more court capacity. 
Temporary courts in Birmingham, Hull, Lancaster, Middlesbrough and Stafford will close at the end of June. HM Courts & Tribunals Service said it will consider alternative venues in locations where an ‘operational need remains’. 
Law Society president, Stephanie Boyce said: ‘We’ve been saying for some time that government must maximise existing court capacity as we emerge from lockdown and boost capacity through many more Nightingale courts in order to increase the amount of jury trials that can safely take place, enabling access to justice for victims, witnesses and defendants.’ 
There is another consultation happening, this being the third since remote hearings were introduced. This is due to the restrictions easing meaning the way family court hearings happen could be due to change to fit in line with these easing of restrictions. 
The 2 week rapid consultation is based around remote, hybrid and in person hearings in the family justice system and court of protection. 
This survey will be based around the pros and cons of remote working, attending court in person and also what parts of remote working would be beneficial to keep. 
The consultation is due to close on the 27th June with findings being published the following month. 
There is finally a date for the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 to come into force, the date has been set for the 6th April 2022. 
This has been extended from the original estimation of Autumn 2021, but there is no worry that this 6th April 2022 date could be moved due to it now being fixed as a matter of parliamentary record. 
The former chair of resolution Nigel Shepherd gave a comment on this, “Whilst any delay is disappointing, we do now have certainty over the introduction of this important reform, and will be able to advise clients accordingly” 
This Act will bring a change to how divorce, dissolution and separations are conducted and hopefully give them a more amicable feel in such a high intense part of someone’s life. 
Will zoom and virtual meetings become the norm between lawyers and their clients? 
This is a question that has been asked many times since virtual meetings became the new way to communicate with clients when the pandemic set in. 
Figures show that 71% of clients were comfortable with virtual meetings such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams. With this in mind, the figure for clients thinking about using law firms from across the country has increased from 46% in 2019 to 59% in 2021. 
This has given law firms who would usually see client’s face to face, a new avenue to explore with the potential for offering a service to clients across the country. This also gives the client the ability to choose a law firm who may suit them better instead of choosing a legal firm solely on their proximity to their home or work. 
As technology and the way we communicate progresses, law firms will need to evolve with new technology, to offer the best service to their clients. 
A judge who has explored the reasons behind a chronic shortage of medical experts in the family justice system hopes the days when an expert witness had to attend court in person could now be over. 
A working group led by Mr Justice David Williams found that many health professionals they interviewed were concerned as to how they could manage a busy NHS practice with the perceived inflexibilities of the court system. The group suggested that remote court attendance should become the norm unless personal attendance was necessary. 
For a long time, Family law has been very adult centric and has not focused on the child, with this comes tension between parents, which, in turn, affects the child’s mental health. 
In the early 1980’s Resolution began with the aim to change the way family law works, offering a more amicable solution for clients, resulting in children having a more positive outlook on the situation. Resolution has focused on specialist training and interdisciplinary working for family lawyers and has produced a wealth of amicable client focused lawyers. 
Resolution have also been backing the ‘no fault divorce campaign’, with the idea that it will bring less tension and conflict within a separation, thus providing better outcomes to the children of the relationship. Resolution have been successful with this campaign and the no fault divorce will be implemented at the end of 2021. 
In 2020 alone, there were almost 56,000 children applications made affecting roughly 100,000 children, some of these cases took up to 39 weeks to conclude giving an average of 11 weeks longer than the previous year. 
Over the years there has been many charities and campaigns who have tackled this conflict affecting children of separated parents. One of these is the Positive Parenting Alliance, its aim is to “start a wider conversation in society about separation with the hopes that, over time, there will be a change in culture and a reframing so that children’s needs come first when a relationship ends”. 
Hopefully, we will see a decrease in children affected by the conflict of separation with the help of the Positive Parenting Alliance campaign and Resolutions continued efforts to set out standards for lawyers to have a more amicable, child focused outlook. 
Nightingale courts were first opened due to the back log of court cases caused by the pandemic. Delays occurred due to measures first put in place in the first lockdown when hearings were adjourned to a date further into the year. 
Methods such as using teams/BT meet me were introduced to try and reduce this backlog, but this did not make a significant impact due to the number of back logged cases. This is when the nightingale courts were introduced. Some were in venues such as football clubs, libraries and theatres. 
Now there have been talks to close 12 of those courts as early as June due to hire agreements expiring. On top of the expiring agreements there is also the issue of sites needing to go back to their original use due to the easement of lockdown rules. 
There have also been talks as to whether the nightingale courts are still needed. The Law Society and the Bar Council have both stated that instead of decreasing the number of nightingale courts more are actually needed, especially with the number of the back log cases currently standing at 57,000. 
The only thing we know as of now is that there is so much uncertainty surrounding these nightingale courts and only time will tell as to when they start to close or even increase in numbers. 
Plans for a new City of London court complex have been put on hold with objections from SAVE Britain’s heritage and other conservation groups. 
The proposed court complex would be on Fleet Street holding the City of London police headquarters, an eight-story court building and a third commercial building. 
For the court complex to be built buildings such as the Chronical House would need to be demolished. This is where the heritage and conservation groups object. 
There are a lot of pros to this new complex being built; 400 newly created jobs will be available on top of the 2,100 jobs already in motion, the complex has been designed in a way that it will last at least 125 years, it will help drive growth in the square mile to retain the City of London’s position as the global Centre for business, law, and justice. 
Of course, with pros there are also cons, the main one being the demolition of historical buildings in the Fleet Street area. 
Financial proceedings can be somewhat messy especially when parties actively try and hide assets in the hope the other party gets less of a settlement than they actually deserve. It can be even messier when parties involve family including their own children in the process of hiding said assets. 
This was certainly shown in the case of Akhmedov V Akhmedov and others, a £450m divorce case. 
Farkhad Akhmedov involved his son in the process of disposing assets to hinder his ex-wife’s claims, the son even admitted to Mrs Justice Knowles that “he had helped his father protect his assets from his mother’s claims”. Mrs Justice Knowles did not accept the sons case that he was a go between for his father and made it clear his actions were done with intent. 
This case has been a major subject for the media due to the nature of the family. Especially the judgement handed down, being that Farkhad was ordered to pay his ex-wife £453,576,152. 
Messy financial proceedings can cost parties hundreds, thousands, even hundreds of thousands of pounds more in legal fees and time. Sometimes messy proceedings cannot be prevented, but when parties are both amicable it does show in the outcome and costs. 
Hopefully this case will be a learning curve for those parties in a better position than the other wanting to try and hinder claims that may be rightfully deserved. 

Arrange your confidential appointment for FREE 

Office tel: 01543 441 802 
Opening hours: 
Monday to Friday: 9am - 5pm 
(6PM for appointments only) 
Saturday: 9am - 2pm 
(For appointments only) 
Office tel: 01543 441 802 
Mon-Fri: 9AM - 5PM 
(6PM for appointments only) 
Sat: 9AM - 2PM 
(For appointments only) 
Our site uses cookies. For more information, see our cookie policy. Accept cookies and close
Reject cookies Manage settings