Justice system not ready to support 26-week time limit for care cases: Resolution

There is a risk that the Children and Families Bill will result in a greater focus on meeting the proposed statutory 26-week time limit for completing care cases than on the needs of the child, Resolution has claimed.

In a briefing on the Bill, the association – which has 6,500 family lawyers, mediators, collaborative practitioners and other family professionals as members – said: “Certain measures will have to be in place to ensure cases are completed without delay, whilst still acting in the child’s interests.

“In our members’ view, the system is not yet ready to support this time limit in the majority of cases. For example, we remain concerned about the provision of necessary expert evidence within a timescale allowing for completion of the case within 26 weeks, including the need for a workable, consistent and speedy system for the authorising of publicly funded experts’ fees so that necessary expert evidence can proceed.”

Resolution added that judicial continuity and effective first hearings – facilitated by local authority pre-proceedings preparation and the active involvement of Cafcass from the outset – would also be key to timetabling of cases and early identification of the issues.            

The association also expressed concern that the Bill appeared to require cases to be brought back to court every eight weeks to permit another eight week extension, “even where the court knows that it will not be possible to complete the case in eight weeks and this will be inconsistent with the needs of the child”.

The Bill should require cases to be completed without delay and within 26 weeks, Resolution accepted, but it should also give power to the judge to case manage matters outside of that timeframe in order to resolve the proceedings justly and in the child’s best interest.

“At the very least, the guidance set out in Clause 14(7) should refer to extensions of the time limit in the interests of children,” it added.

The association also called for appropriate resources to be made available to meet the target.

In other comments, Resolution said there should be a positive duty for the court to consider at an early stage whether expert evidence was necessary in children proceedings in order to avoid later delays.

It suggested that early consideration of the need for expert evidence would “avoid the risk of a litigant producing expert evidence at the last minute and without leave; or parties realising at a late stage that expert evidence is required, both of which can cause delays”.  

The associations also said it would prefer to see reference in Clause 13 of the Bill to the positive reasons for obtaining expert evidence in children proceedings, rather than focusing on factors or reasons not to obtain evidence.

A copy of the briefing can be viewed here.