Guest viewing is limited

Hearing to determine need for Fact Finding

BilalDad

New member
Member
Hi all,

Just finalising my position statement which needs to be submitted on Friday as in 2 weeks today I have the second hearing which is to determine a) the need for me to do a hair strand test b) the need for a fact finding hearing.

Wondering if anyones been in a similar boat about having a hearing to determine the need for a fact finding hearing and how that’s gone for anyone? Would appreciate any advice and support.

Cheers
 
Hi.

This might be a good time to get some legal advice.

Position statements should usually be brief and punchy but not overdone.
 
I had an interim hearing that ended up covering hair strand and need for a fact finding. The judge looked at her evidence and was not impressed. I agreed to hair strand test and committed £500 to pay for it. It was listed for a one day final hearing.

This hearing plays on my mind. The judge was so dismissive of my ex he did not even order a section 7 report, despite many and various allegations against me. The issues in Family Law Act applications were "adjourned with liberty to restore, evidence in one to stand as evidence in the other." This meant we had a child arrangements final hearing that was taken up almost entirely by nonsense allegations that should have been put to bed. There was no independent voice from cafcass or services involved with the family.

If I could go back in time, I would be very cautious about letting myself get pushed into the same corner. There would have been benefit to having allegations either concluded or thrown aside.

Sorry to say, with experience of the exact same situation, I am still puzzled.
 
I had three hearing and three different judges. Each time starting from zero and dealing with prejudice from somebody who plainly had no idea of the case and had not even read statements. "Judicial continuity" would have been a Godsend.

Have a think about this, it could be good to get your head around grounds for requesting/demanding judicial continuity and have them ready. You could then use if it feels to your advantage on the day.

This stuff is complicated and I am an amateur: Here is a copy and paste to get you started:

"Practice Direction 12b

Judicial continuity

10.1
All private law cases will be allocated to a level of judge within the Family Court upon issue.

10.2
Continuity of Judicial involvement in the conduct of proceedings from the FHDRA to the making of a final order should be the objective in all cases

10.3
Where the case has been allocated to be heard before lay justices, the expectation of judicial continuity should apply where –

(1) There has been a hearing to determine findings of fact,

(2) A decision yet to be made in the interests of a child by a court depends upon rulings or judicial assessments already made in the proceedings,

in which case, wherever possible, the hearing shall be listed before the same lay justices; alternatively, it shall be listed before the same the legal adviser and at least one lay justice (preferably the chairman) to provide that continuity. Where a case is adjourned part-heard the court which resumes the hearing shall, wherever possible, be composed of the same lay justices as dealt with the previous part of the hearing (see rule 8 of the Family Court (Composition and Distribution of Business) Rules 2014)."
 
When you say it's a second hearing coming up - is it the first hearing you'll have attended or the second one (because these days there tends to be a gatekeeping hearing first which parents aren't present at - then the next hearing is called the first hearing!).

In your position statement you could say why you do or don't want a fact finding hearing. This will be your position. For example if you say you have evidence that the allegations are untrue and have a x year history of trouble free co parenting and the allegations made are spurious, and made because you applied to court, so you ask for the matter to go straight to a final hearing and present evidence. That would be one position. On the other hand, if you have clear evidence she's lying about the allegations, you might want a fact find to knock the allegations on the head and then it goes to a final hearing.

But all this is delay - hearing after hearing. I am guessing this second hearing is actually your first FHDRA is that right? Where it will be decided what's needed next. Could you do the hair strand test in advance maybe (can't remember if that's been discussed already)?

Agree that it would be a good idea to get legal advice over whether fact find should be avoided or pushed for - some will depend on your particular situation. Assume your ex has a solicitor? If so, they will be pushing for anything and everything that causes delays - hair strand test, fact find etc.
 
Back
Top