Recent High Court rulings on “conduct” in divorce financial remedies have created uncertainty in applying section 25(2)(g) of the Matrimonial Causes Act, increasing cost and unpredictability for divorcing parties and underscoring the urgent need for clear statutory reform.
Proposed reforms in England and Wales could remove jury trials for offences carrying sentences under three years, replacing them with judge-only hearings. Supporters cite efficiency and cost savings, while critics warn of weakened civil liberties, reduced public trust, and a profound shift in the future of justice.
A domestic violence prosecution collapsed after the complainant refused to continue giving evidence, prompting the Crown to rely on res gestae. Defence arguments on spontaneity, reliability, and fairness succeeded, leading to not guilty verdicts.
This article explores how tribunals and the EAT assess future loss in unfair dismissal cases, highlighting Polkey reductions, tribunal reasoning, and the need to properly evaluate evidence when setting compensatory awards.
![Highway liability & grass verges: Demetrios Karpasitis v Hertfordshire County Council [2025] EWCA Civ 788](https://chroniclelaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/nils-schirmer-t2gEfUp9iiA-unsplash-768x512.jpg "Highway liability & grass verges: Demetrios Karpasitis v Hertfordshire County Council [2025] EWCA Civ 788")
Court of Appeal guidance on highway liability and evidential fairness in Karpasitis v Hertfordshire CC, analysing s41 and s58 Highways Act duties, GPS inspection evidence, and the treatment of “manifestly incredible” witness statements.
This article examines the revised PD 27A changes to Family Procedure Rules, highlighting how earlier bundle filing and stricter court requirements increase counsel’s professional duties, preparation time, and accountability in financial remedies proceedings.
The Pathfinder Pilot reforms private law children cases by prioritising early risk assessment, safety, and multi-agency support. It replaces the standard process to reduce delays, make proceedings less adversarial, and deliver quicker, more sustainable outcomes for families.
Exceptional hardship appeals offer motorists a final opportunity to avoid a driving ban under the totting-up system, but the threshold is deliberately high. While many applications fail due to weak evidence or poor presentation, a refusal in the Magistrates’ Court is not the end. Drivers have an automatic right to appeal to the Crown Court. With strict rules, tight deadlines, and a more demanding appeal process, expert legal representation is often essential to maximise the chances of success.
Subject access requests are rising, often creating significant time and cost burdens. The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 allows only a “reasonable and proportionate search” for personal data, but recent cases, including Ashley v HMRC (2025), show that the effort involved in reviewing and redacting data can also be considered disproportionate. Organisations may therefore argue that both the search and the review/redaction process are unreasonable when compliance would be excessively burdensome.
![Addressing time limits at preliminary hearings: Mesuria v Eurofins Forensic Services Ltd [2025] EAT 103](https://chroniclelaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/getty-images-rt_ru4K9eu8-unsplash-768x512.jpg "Addressing time limits at preliminary hearings: Mesuria v Eurofins Forensic Services Ltd [2025] EAT 103")
In Mesuria v Eurofins Forensics Services Ltd [2025] EAT 103, the EAT held that tribunals must clearly distinguish between determining a preliminary issue and striking out a claim. The Employment Judge failed to specify which approach applied when addressing time-limit and merits issues, leading to procedural unfairness. The appeal succeeded, and the case was remitted. The decision highlights the need for precise directions at preliminary hearings, especially where litigants in person are involved, to ensure fairness and prevent tribunals from exceeding their remit.
In CX v Ministry of Justice, the EAT upheld the Tribunal’s refusal to allow a late amendment adding disability discrimination claims, finding it would introduce entirely new issues and expand the case significantly. The decision reinforces that amendment applications must be judged by their practical impact, timing, and potential prejudice, not just legal form. Practitioners are reminded to plead clearly, act promptly on new evidence, and prepare detailed arguments on the necessity and consequences of proposed amendments.
The High Court’s judgment in DPP v Barton [2024] clarifies the prosecution’s discretion to rely on res gestae evidence in domestic abuse cases, even when the complainant does not testify, highlighting the balance between fairness and effective prosecution.
This article examines whether unproven allegations should be admissible in Pre-Sentence Reports (PSRs), exploring the legal boundaries under section 308 of the Sentencing Act 2020, relevant case law, and the role of Defence counsel and the Probation Service in assessing dangerousness.
This case analysis of Re L [2022] EWCA Civ 169 examines whether judges can make findings outside the threshold document, highlighting the Court of Appeal’s approach to fairness, evidence, and case management in family law.
In this exclusive family law blog for Cansford, legal expert John Bolch examines the persistent and complex issue of domestic abuse in the UK. Drawing on recent headlines, government reports, and court statistics, he highlights how domestic violence continues to challenge both victims and the family courts tasked with protecting them.
Be the first to know
Subscribe for our latest legal news in your inbox. All for FREE.