Reform of Private Family Law Hearings 2025-02-13

Opened the debate

It is a sad reality that marriages fail, leading to disruption and pain for children. An amicable relationship between parents would ideally avoid contested hearings in court, but such hearings are necessary in some cases due to inefficiencies and lack of responsiveness in the current system. The main issue highlighted is the constitution of those on the bench who hear child arrangement order cases, which should always prioritise a child’s best interests. Dr Shastri-Hurst shares a personal story about a young child facing emotional distress due to their situation being decided in court without proper consideration for their well-being. He points out that as of August 2023, there were 16,671 open private law children's cases with an average case resolution time of 44 weeks, leading to uncertainty and stress for the child. The current system allows magistrates, who are not required to hold formal legal qualifications beyond some specific training, to make decisions that can have long-lasting impacts on a child’s life, which is concerning given the potential subconscious biases and lack of specialised knowledge in family law compared to district judges. Dr Shastri-Hurst argues for abolishing the role of magistrates in private law children's cases and ensuring such cases are heard by a specialist family judge who undergoes rigorous training.

Government Response

Sir Nicholas Dakin acknowledges the importance of mitigating disruption and pain caused by family law hearings to children. He clarifies that magistrates in the family court are referred to as 'lay justices' but uses 'family magistrates' for this debate context. Family magistrates undergo rigorous selection and comprehensive training provided by the Judicial College, making significant contributions to protecting vulnerable members of society, particularly children, since before the inception of the family court in 2014. He highlights that these magistrates bring diverse impartial perspectives and experiences, crucial for fair decision-making. The Government recognises the concerns about magistrate training but believes existing safeguards such as robust protocols for allocating and reallocating cases are in place to ensure fairness. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the quality of training provided to magistrates is of a high standard, safeguarding their independence from Government as outlined in the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The Judicial College provides comprehensive training programmes to equip family magistrates with necessary skills and knowledge. When sitting in court, family magistrates are supported by justices’ legal advisers who provide advice on law and procedures. All judges must prioritise the welfare of children according to the Children Act 1989 and undergo extensive training before appointment. Justices' legal advisers play an integral part in decision-making processes as confirmed in case law. Family magistrates rely on assessments carried out by trained professionals for key rulings, enhancing the quality of decisions. They handle appropriate cases based on their training while more complex cases are managed at higher judicial levels to maintain efficiency and justice. Family magistrates are essential in the family justice system, dealing with outstanding cases since 2018, despite recent steps taken to reduce caseloads. Removing capacity from the system would undermine effective administration of justice and impact children's wellbeing. The Government remains committed to reforming private family law processes through a new pathfinder model extended to mid and west Wales in March and West Yorkshire in June. This model includes dedicated support for domestic abuse survivors, up-front multi-agency information sharing, and emphasis on the voice of the child through production of a child impact report. Family magistrates are indispensable in hearing private law children’s cases due to their collaboration with justices’ legal advisers, quality training, mechanisms for case allocation, and contribution to alleviating judicial burdens.