VIEW FROM THE PRESIDENT’S CHAMBERS (18)
The on-going process of reform – Financial Remedies Courts
Sir James Munby, President of the Family Division
Although there has been much reform of the processes and procedures in the family justice system in
recent years, there is one area in which little has been done and much needs to be done: financial
remedies. This is the Cinderella of family justice. Some of its failings were exposed by the Law
Commission in its 2014 report, ‘Matrimonial Property, Needs and Agreements,’ Law Com No 343. They
need to be remedied.
I set out here my vision of what needs to be done and my current thinking as to how this vision can
be achieved. The former builds on what I said in my ‘17th View from the President's Chambers: divorce
and money – where are we and where are we going?' [2017] Fam Law 607, the latter builds on
‘President's Circular: Financial Remedies Courts’ [2018] Fam Law 91.
The need for and the many benefits to be derived from the introduction of a national system of
Financial Remedies Courts were persuasively argued by HHJ Martin O'Dwyer, HHJ Edward Hess and
Joanna Miles: Hess and Miles, ‘The recognition of money work as a speciality in the family courts by
the creation of a national network of Financial Remedies Units' [2016] Fam Law 1335, and O'Dwyer,
Hess and Miles, ‘Financial Remedies Courts' [2017] Fam Law 625. I have made clear my support for
this from the outset: see ‘Note by the President' [2016] Fam Law 1340. Overwhelmingly, as to the
substance, the reaction has been very positive. In relation to the specifics there have been a few,
though in fact surprisingly few, more questioning voices.
My core ambition for financial remedy work is to improve significantly both the application of
procedural justice and the delivery of substantive justice.
Procedural justice will be bettered by the appointment of a cadre of specialist judges to the Financial
Remedies Court (FRC) and by a process of early allocation of a case to the right judge at the right level
at the right place, so as to ensure maximum efficiency. It will be bettered by the application and
enforcement of standard directions and interim orders and by ensuring that FDRs (where the majority
of cases settle already) are conducted with consistency, with sufficient time being allowed not only
for the hearing but also for judicial preparation.
The delivery of substantive justice will be improved by an improved programme of judicial training; by
the reporting of judgments in small and medium cases by the judges of the FRC to promote
transparency and consistency; and by ensuring that sufficient time is allowed for the preparation and
conduct of final hearings. An increase in transparency will result in increased predictability of
outcome, which in turn should lead to a higher rate of settlement or, for those cases that do not settle,
a reduced rate of appeals.
The basic concept of the FRC, which builds on both the Family Court and regionalised Court of
Protection models, is as follows:
• The FRC, which will be part of the Family Court, will deal with all types of financial remedy
cases dealt with in the Family Court or Family Division: claims for ancillary and other relief
under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973; claims under Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989;
claims under Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984; and, in due course,
