Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Practice makes... more work

I commented yesterday on the need for the plethora of Practice Directions supplemental to the new Family Procedure Rules. Practice Direction 35A is a case in point. It reads:
This Practice Direction supplements FPR rule 35.2(Relevant disputes: applications for consent orders in respect of financial remedies)

1.1 An application for an order to which rule 35.2 applies must be completed in English or accompanied by a translation into English.

1.2 Where the application is supported by evidence of explicit consent to the application by a party, the evidence must also be in English or accompanied by a translation into English.

1.3 Where a party chooses to write to the court consenting to the making of the order the correspondence must be in English or accompanied by a translation into English.

Was a Practice Direction really required to say this?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.