1 Introduction
1. On 20 July 2010 we announced our inquiry into the Operation
of the Family Courts prompted by the new Government's proposals
in four areas which would impact on the courts. Proposals for
the reform of legal aid; changes to the current joint-sponsorship
arrangements for the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support
Service (Cafcass); encouraging the use of mediation in resolving
matters before they reach court; and the statutory scheme for
increasing media access to the family courts all merited scrutiny
in the particular context of family law. We also wanted to provide
democratic oversight of the Family Justice Review's interim proposals;
and so scrutinise and influence the reform of the family courts
at the earliest possible stage in the policy-making and legislative
process.
2. Our terms of reference focused on four specific areas:
- The role and operation of Cafcass in court proceedings, including
the sponsorship of Cafcass by the Department for Education;
- The impact on court proceedings and access to justice of recent
and proposed changes to legal aid;
- The role, operation and resourcing of mediation in resolving
matters before they reach court;
- Confidentiality and openness in family courts, including the
impact of the proposed scheme in the 2010 Children, Schools and
Families Act.
3. Relationship breakdown and the removal of children from
their birth family are highly emotive areas. Inevitably, some
of the evidence we have heard has been hotly disputed by other
witnesses. Throughout our inquiry we have kept in mind that the
primary purpose of all interventions in family relationships must
be to protect the safety and wellbeing of the child.
4. It should be emphasised at the outset that the private
law cases which appear in the family court system are a minority,
as the evidence suggests that only 10% of all relationship breakdowns
result in a court hearing.[1]
Inevitably, therefore, they are the cases that present particular
challenges where the parties find it impossible to compromise
without assistance.
5. In May 2011 Professor Eileen Munro published her report
into child protection.[2]
The work of local authorities is outside the scope of this inquiry
but we welcome Professor Munro's recommendations on reducing delays
in care proceedings and look forward to the Government's response.
6. We received over 160 submissions from witnesses and took
oral evidence from the witnesses listed at the end of this Report.
We are grateful to all those who took the time to contribute to
our inquiry. We also wish to thank our specialist adviser, Professor
Judith Masson, Professor of Socio-legal Studies, University of
Bristol, for her expert advice and assistance throughout this
inquiry.
1 Family Justice Review, Interim Report, March
2011, Ministry of Justice. (from here on referred to as Interim
Report) Back
2
The Munro Review of Child Protection: Final Report: A child-centred
system, Cm 8062, Department for Education, May 2011 Back
| 
