*/
The use of McKenzie Friends is greater than had been thought, according to research showing that the bulk of their work is done outside court
The Study of fee-charging McKenzie Friends and their work in private family law cases, commissioned by the Bar Council and carried out by academics at the Universities of Cardiff and Bristol, showed that very few paid McKenzie Friends seek to represent litigants in court, preferring to offer advice and support before a case goes to court.
Chair of the Bar, Andrew Langdon QC, said instances of them representing clients in court was ‘smaller than many feared’ and should be ‘nipped in the bud’.
But he said their court work ‘represents the tip of the iceberg’ and highlighted the broader issue of people denied legal aid, who have no choice but to turn to McKenzie Friends.
The report found evidence of ‘difficulties’ presented by McKenzie Friends exercising rights of audience and said ‘concerning’ fee issues should be tackled, but it said clients received ‘a great deal of valuable support’ at a ‘relatively low cost’.
Recently Lady Justice Hallett said the term ‘McKenzie Friend’ was inappropriate in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division.
Giving judgment in R v Conaghan and Others [2017] EWCA Crim 597, she said the increase in applicants represented by ‘unqualified third parties’ has led to ‘totally unmeritorious applications’, that have ‘raised’ applicants’ hopes and taken up court time.
The use of McKenzie Friends is greater than had been thought, according to research showing that the bulk of their work is done outside court
The Study of fee-charging McKenzie Friends and their work in private family law cases, commissioned by the Bar Council and carried out by academics at the Universities of Cardiff and Bristol, showed that very few paid McKenzie Friends seek to represent litigants in court, preferring to offer advice and support before a case goes to court.
Chair of the Bar, Andrew Langdon QC, said instances of them representing clients in court was ‘smaller than many feared’ and should be ‘nipped in the bud’.
But he said their court work ‘represents the tip of the iceberg’ and highlighted the broader issue of people denied legal aid, who have no choice but to turn to McKenzie Friends.
The report found evidence of ‘difficulties’ presented by McKenzie Friends exercising rights of audience and said ‘concerning’ fee issues should be tackled, but it said clients received ‘a great deal of valuable support’ at a ‘relatively low cost’.
Recently Lady Justice Hallett said the term ‘McKenzie Friend’ was inappropriate in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division.
Giving judgment in R v Conaghan and Others [2017] EWCA Crim 597, she said the increase in applicants represented by ‘unqualified third parties’ has led to ‘totally unmeritorious applications’, that have ‘raised’ applicants’ hopes and taken up court time.
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
A career shaped by advocacy beyond her practice, and the realities of living with an invisible disability – Dr Natasha Shotunde, Black Barristers’ Network Co-Founder and its Chair for seven years, reflects on a decade at the Bar
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
