This topic was recently covered in a consultation issued by judges that updates guidance to courts on what level of judge or magistrate should sit on a case and generally how applications received will be efficiently administered.
The guidance says that it applies to the allocation of all relevant proceedings to the judiciary of the Family Court, which includes magistrates. The purpose is to ensure that all cases are allocated to the appropriate level of judiciary and, where appropriate, to a named case management judge or case manager who shall provide continuity for the proceedings.
Wee thought this was an opportunity to raise an ongoing problem in reporters trying to get information about the type of case they might want to attend and report on.
At present the use of the Listing Code to tell reporters what issues are alleged in a case isn’t being used in all courts in a consistent way. We thought practice could be be improved by specifically including this point in the allocation and gatekeeping stage.
Here is our response:
The Transparency Project is an educational charity (no. 1161271) operating in England and Wales concerned with family justice matters.
At present, The Transparency Project is the only educational charity that is approved by the President of the Family Division to send ‘legal bloggers’ (duly authorised lawyers) in to observe and report on family proceedings. A legal blogger is a duly authorised lawyer under Family Procedure Rule r 27.11 who is not otherwise involved in a case but who attends hearings for research or public educational purposes. We publish our reports from court on www.transparencyproject.org.uk
We suggest the revised allocation and gatekeeping guidance is an opportunity to incorporate the aims of the President’s Transparency Review and the Open Reporting Provisions reflected in the rule changes from January 2025 (FPR PD12R).
Currently, the information appearing on court lists to inform potential reporters (journalists and legal bloggers) is partial and inconsistent Hearings in public law are to be listed as ‘Category C’ if reporters are entitled to attend, and are to include to a Listing Code indicating the issues (1 – 14) in the case. However, this information is often missing from lists. Practice varies across and within different court areas.
We therefore suggest adding a sentence to the new guidance to clarify when the information for reporters is to be added and who is responsible for doing this.
Secondly, we suggest that the categories 1 – 14 are also applied in listed hearings in private law, as there is currently a dearth of information for a potential reporter on a private law case. Categories 5 (domestic abuse); 9 (contact issues/prolonged period of no contact); and 13 and 14 (relocation) may be the most commonly used, although other categories e.g. 4 (emotional abuse) may also be used.
To address these points we suggest that after para 8 on p 3, an extra paragraph is added:
Where the proceedings are those to which Paragraph 1.2 of PD12R applies, the Gatekeeping Team will consider whether the first hearing to be listed is one which a reporter is entitled to attend under FPR 27.11 and, if so, will add a numerical code to the listing as appropriate. This stage applies to both public law and private law hearings. The code will be displayed on the court list for each subsequent hearing.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Image: Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash