Hello. Welcome, everybody. Mind softer, Mahmoud. And I'm very pleased to welcome you to today's session through data law. This is advocacy in family law cases, part two as of August 2019. Now this follows on from the previous one hour session that I did, where I'm taking you through some elements off family advocacy to give you some hopefully useful tips and pointers in both preparing for advocacy and also conducting the actual advocacy itself. Last time you remember, I spent a fair bit of time go through with you somebody aspects surrounding some of the conduct issues related to advocacy and also particularly when it comes to preparation for hearings in terms of making sure that there are effective documents prepared in readiness, including the position statements, collection arguments on also submissions in that regard and also really dealing with initial hearings in particular. Today I'm going to be spending more time with you going through aspects relation to hoping speeches, for example, paying for advocacy generally on also be going through some aspects with you off calling evidence, some live evidence and also different types of hearings. Whether you're acting for parties in Children proceedings, finance cases. We've been having a look at that on also looking specifically at somebody case laws. It's developed insofar as advocacy. Andi, going forward in that regard, will also be looking at some aspects surrounding what the role of the judges when parties are calling evidence, for example. So I love the look of that on also looking at specific types of hearings, particularly finding of fact hearings, Onda preparing dollars and also drafting position statements that will be a number of issues on drafting. Sorry, a skeleton arguments. So it'll be a number of issues I'll be going through with you. In that regard, there is case law and statute provisions referred to here, which is acknowledged as being protected by crank crop right and also dfe as corporate author. So when it comes to prepay for advocacy, as I mentioned last time, and really what on which to emphasize again? His preparation is absolutely vital with these matters, and the more you pay in advance, the better you will be in court and you'll be able to run matters much more swiftly on more capably. So very, very important to analyze the case carefully. So when you do an advocacy. Ask yourself both when you're preparing and also when you at court as to what can be agreed. I'm gonna found when I've done hearings, sometimes matters which are very contested from the outset on reading the papers, you actually go to court and you surprise yourself in that. Actually, you're able to now ADANDE issues on actually agree a lot more than you may have been able to do so. Similarly, of course, it works the other way where you may think that matters particularly straight forward on papers. But then you go to court on. There are particularly striking features were to make it particularly complex, and there is a huge dispute off a particular matter, so it varies a lot, and therefore it's very if he caught to be able to almost, I take the view that matters are straightforward otherwise, because it's very difficult to predict in that regard. So look at what can be agreed and you'll find out a lot. Matters can in fact be agreed in readiness for the hearing. What points don't do wanted to make the court us the other issue on really now England. The points in dispute very, very important. When you're dealing with these matters, hearken the witnesses than help my case or whichever witness you're going to be calling You do need to ask yourself how early actually advanced their case? How can there for actually damaged a case? Eso What will they be saying? What should they be saying? What particular matters do you need to be focusing on on Day four? With that in mind, you need to ask yourself what particular points it is it that you wish to a need to draw out in both examination in chief on cross examination and re examination. Now, when you are making submissions, as I mentioned earlier, very important as I mentioned the first session to make a list of key submissions on. Also try and reference to wear those aspect something in the page number in a bundle. So I wasn't just writing at your speech, which you'll find in practice. You simply won't be to read out on it. It just doesn't work that way because you have to be very fluid in court. If you write out key submissions, then it would enable you to focus on doors, but also if you refer to the various pages in the bundle, it'll be a lot easier for them for you to be able to then turn to that particular part in a bundle to be up to put more detail on Marty, if necessary. Sometimes highlighting text or in the lining go annotating, of course, helps massively on. Also using subject dividers does help in that regard. Now, when you're dealing with opponents, Andi contested matters very important to ensure that you do have a line off discussion of communication with other parties on bond. With that in mind, trying to agree matters as best as you can. Some lawyers at court, maybe more experience to new. But that doesn't mean that day necessarily would be correct. Of course, it's very much a question of application of the law to the facts off the case, and what I always find is having a common understanding between lawyers as to a way forward and helps a lot when you are before the court points to note then with opening speeches. The essence to a good speech is to be able to be concise, very importantly, concise, to be factual, on, to be direct and helpful. The court will find out, if your help for to judge in terms of what has been discussed and considered and it's persuasive and it's helpful and helps the judge to make a decision, of course, order more reason but a judge, then to take on board what you've mentioned to enable you to continue with that, you need to make sure that in your opening speech you do set out certain aspect. So do make reference to the preliminary documents used These. So if you're referring to a background, you may be referring to the case. Some may, for example, or possibly chronology, referred to the statement of issues. Sometimes when you before the judge, it may be helpful to immediately go to state issues and invite the court. Consider that talk to buy PAP scored three goals in in a particular way. Sometimes it may be that when you call before the judge, the judge specifically wants you to turn to a particular parties positions tape, In which case, if, of course, it is in the bond we to refer to that straight away. Make sure that you inform the court fame much from the outset us to what matters are in dispute on what you're invited the court to determine. So if, for example, say the application, the substance of application is opposed, that it's very, very important to bring this to the court's attention at the outset and therefore fe importance of judges away of that on also set out the attempt to have actually made to resolve matters on a particularly use of non court dispute resolutions farce that is concerned. So what attempts have been made on what? How far that has actually gone with looking at her, trying to agree, matted, insofar as that is concerned. Okay, that didn't brings me on to looking at calling live evidence. I want to spend some time with you now looking at the position with examination in chief now, Examination Chief, as you know, is the stage at which you will be calling your client in order. Witness on. This is where you wish to draw out their case sauce to then in turn tendon for cross examination. Now you do need to ask yourself what specific information to one is draught in examination chief or even in cross examination, as we'll see later in family cases. A lot of the evidence in chief will be containing a witness statements in any event now witness statements, as I mentioned earlier under practice, Direction 27 a are to be limited to exclude exhibits to 25 pages, and therefore, if it's going to be more than that, then you do need permission. Or sometimes there may be need for permission to seek to file a supplemental statement. But a lot of the in chief will be contained within your client's statement. And if it examination, Chief can sometimes take the form off simply asking your client to confirm our North or to swear on the holy book the truth of their statement. And they wish for that state to be accused as their evidence. It may be that there are a number of statements which down prepared on all of those statements to not being adduced. It's evidence how, how he said that if we do which to our supplemental questions over and above what's in the witness's statement or there's been an event has just occurred recently. Let's say which you wish to bring out and of course, that's where with the court's permission. You may wish to them be Ask you supplemental questions over and above what in the witness statement. Now with the examination chief, try not to make too many lists off questions to ask. What you tend to find is if you do a list of too many questions, you'll find it may be very difficult Feed all through those on. Of course, witnesses are not going to necessarily give answers in the same way with in which you have prepared your questions. I should prepared, like 20 questions, for example, and you are say, Question three without the witness understandably being aware of this. That may give you the answer to question 19 for example, without giving it the answer Question three on are simply because they don't know what the order is in which you've asked questions or you're prepared questions, and therefore it makes it very difficult for you as an advert advocate to keep control. So sometimes I would suggest that try not to do too many questions that you're prepared on, written down in your in chief. Try and write down key themes, keywords, key phrases on that allows you to focus more on that and then to be abused. The answers that witnesses giving you Do you have to use that as a way off them? Phrasing your next question. So that sometimes helps a lot, so rather a long list of questions. Sometimes it's used for there to make more use of bullet points as a guide, rather a long list of questions. And that tends to work quite well for many lawyers. One of the golden rules, of course, with examination chief is other than a few exceptions, you cannot ask leading questions ie those questions, which suggest a particular answer. So to avoid that, you should be using set and started words such as what? Where? How went describe, for example. So those kind of questions off example. If you take our somebody to describe something that's not leading, so if if you artists are somebody something like, Can you describe what the weather was like that day? Then of course you're not. Leading them was if you were to ask them to say, Can you confirm that it was raining that day? And of course that's leading them. And if that matter was in dispute and of course, that question was one which would not be admitted because you've let the witness Andi because that particular Matt was in dispute. That would be objection, something that would be objected to so limit in examine. When you're conducting examination, Chief normally meant what is a client statement. But as I mentioned, sometimes you may wish to ask the court's permission to us some supplemental questions if there's been more recent events. For example, if I said a client's witnessed eight finishes on a particular date, for example, and you wish to bring out some evidence after that date. But again, you do need to ask yourself is to why you're doing it that way. Why you haven't in a later statement. So if you have done that substance subsequent statement that it may be that that's put together on your seeking to court permission to rely upon that later statement a Z evidence. In that way, not one of the other things is when you are, uh, acting for the other party. So if I was acting for the applicant figs and put under an examination chief and you're acting for the respondent, it's very important for you to take a note of any evidence in chief because you may then be used needing someone else answered and using them during cross examination. So if, for example, in Chief, my client was to say something like the reason why I don't take the child her doctor was because it was, uh, going to be the case, that it was going to take too long to drive to the doctors, for example. Then if you're for the respondent, you may then use that when you cross examining. So then when you cross examining, you may put that to the to the witness to say something like you said earlier in Examination Chief Simon Song. And he can use that phrase your next question where they reach done, undermining what they case may be. Okay, keep careful notes off the in chief. And this is where it's very important to leave space on your notes that your prepared both for examination Chief Cross examination to add additional points on a very important when you're doing examination Chief and indeed also cross examination to control the witness. So bring them back to the issue in hand. If you've asked a particular witness of question on. Then they start giving you answers, but which are somewhat off on a tangent than this is. We do need to bring them back on. That's where you do need to say to them along the lines of If I can stop you on that. If I can ask you to come back to this point or if I can ask you to focus on this particular issue on DSO foresee, bring them back to a particular theme. And one way to do that sometimes is to take the witness to a particular scene. So ah, way to do that. Sometimes it's to say something like this. I'm not going to be asking you questions in relation to the 25th of June on in particular three evening off that day. And then what that does is that neighbors them, then to home in on focus on that. For example, one of the other things is, if the witness is talking too fast, of course, control them, tell them to try and speak slowly because they need to be talking at a pace where the other parties, and particularly the judge of the Magistrates, can write down what else think Make sure that they face to court on the judge of the Magistrates when they are giving evidence on Also very important to bear in mind that you do not really ask a question to which you are not confident as you know what the answer is like to be. So you need to be confident with the question you're going to be asking in terms off what the like. The answers are going to be Try not to fiddle when you asking questions. As I mentioned, Onda also let the witness know what happens next. So once you've asked you questions and examination, chief, then you do need to really prepare your witness for the next day. So that's where you may say to them something like, Please remain where you are, Mr Mrs Miss offsetting questions for you now. So just prepared a witness for tender them now for cross examination Essentially okay, Now in terms a cross examination Wonder key Things, of course, is as as set out here is you mustn't get cross with the witness cross examination. You are there to, uh, undermined the other side's case to advance your client's case. Undermined upon his case. But you're not there to get annoyed. You're not there to, uh, get to get cross with the witness and member your lawyer. You must not get personal at all in these matters. You must must remain professional at all times. Andi, you're not there to badger. You know there to discriminate. You're not there to be aggressive. You're there to cross examine on day four to attack the credibility of the other party. But in a way which your firm, but the same time polite. You can undermine your pawns case by their for show under limitations in the witness evidence or by discrediting them sometimes sometimes by really this joint discrepancies or tell you or to your motives. So, for example, it may be the case that if you cross examining somebody in relation to what they say, they reason what needs are for the Pepsi's off, say a financial relief application, then you're looking at that you can cross examining by suggesting that they are stating that day need a particular amount of capital incumbent and you can cross examining by suggesting that they have board particular items in the past which were not as expensive as what they are claiming they need now. So why is that while they're doing that? Is it because they are now trying to suggest that they need so much greater than why they're doing that? Is that simply because they are now going through a divorce on day are simply trying to acquire as much of the assets. Now Aziz a. Possibly cancer again, you can use Waze off cross examined them, for example. Theater thing is, of course, would cost examination. You can no only and you can undermine the other side's case. You can advance your client's case. Plus, you can look for inconsistencies in what that client has given in the oil evidence versus what they may have put in their witness statements so you can actually set out inconsistencies insofar as that is concerned. Also, leading questions can, of course, be asked indifference. Very, very important. Make full use of that what you're doing cross examination to be able to ask relevant questions on also to put your case to the other side. Because, of course, you are allowed to lead in that regard, and therefore, sometimes rather than open questions, it may well be better to put your client's case to the other side and therefore to lead them to suggest that that is what happened or that is not what happened as the case may be and you are not limited to cross examining on issues which have been covered in examination. Chief, you're allowed to lead on other matters, but be logical in your order of questioning. Have some structure. Otherwise it will become somewhat haphazard. Andi, it won't make sense and this is where the court may stop you and therefore very, very important off some structure in the way on the manner in which you cross examining and also the questions that you're asking and therefore build up momentum. Some of you will find that you are set the scene, you're build up momentum and then you will be able to call for certain questions which may be used in tow, undermined completely what the other side's cases. So that may well be done in some situations. One of the other key things to bear in mind when you're cross examining is to make sure that you do ask short questions if you asked long questions or you put long statements to the party that may not understand, or it may need to repeating. Or the judge may not accept what you're saying because you put too many questions in one. For example, it's a very, very important to do that. It's a cover one fact at a time that is clear and structured and easy for the witness to follow. So, for example, if I was to cross examine if I said to witness something like, You did take that knife, don't you? When you did use it to threat to my client eight. You would intention being that you wanted to get them annoyed. Not a problem with that is, that's three questions in one on. That's where that could be difficulties. So you want to break it down. So break it down into one some flight. You did take the knife, did you? Not on. I wait for the answer on. You did use it to fight to my client. Yes, on. Then you didn't do it for whatever purpose. So you so you can see if you break it down, it will be more effective for you in that regard. It's a short questions one fact at a time. Make it clear, structured? Well, we'll get you. We need to only feel not getting a response, sometimes with the questions you're asking any due to move on on. Sometimes, of course, courts will ensure that if you are beginning to Badgett a witness or you're pushing for Nancy, that you're not getting the Courtland short, that you are not allowed to continue doing that. And if a judge may will stop you and it's only right and proper that a judge does, it does. It does so in those circumstances. So if you're not getting a response you need, it's very, very important to be able to move on with your questions. And sometimes it's good to put to a witness if they particularly if they really accept your client's position. So if your client's position is very much very different to the other side's, then this is where it's assistance. See if a witness and exceptional class position something like, Do you accept the reason why the garden has taken a stance that shares? So this may be where, say, you're in a care case and you're cross examining mother on the garden is recommending removal, but the mother is opposing. And that's where sometimes trying to put your client's case to the other side is a good way of cross examining. So sometimes you understand why the garden is saying what they are. You understand why the soil, which represents concerned, is what they are. Sometimes those kind of questions do actually assist as well in that regard. So some of you will be a way off the process through which you build up momentum. So you're start off with some general questions. You'll set the scene. You'll get the witness to feel comfortable on. What you do is your be them putting particular points or themes to them, With the region effectively pulling the rug under the feet, sold speaks technique sometimes works very well and can be a very useful and effective way off cross examination. In these circumstances, within look, a re examination on this is used to clarify or develop matters or explain things. Advising out across examine on Lee. You cannot ask a question in reexamination, which you may have gotten to ask in Examination Chief unless that particular question was off. Also, that particular matter was raised in cross examination. And if you do wish to our Somethinin reexamination, which you had forgotten to ask an examination chieftain, as I mentioned, unless it was already raised in cross examination, you're not allowed to raise it without the court's permission. So that's favor important, too, to bear that in mind. And sometimes you may find it may be very little reexamination. Sometimes they may even be knock reexamination. The whole pips of examination is to clay fire. Explain things, and we should try and undo some of the damage that has been done to your client's case in so fast by the cross examination is concerned, and sometimes it may be that if particular damage has been done to the case, then it's best to then are some general questions and reexamination to almost re balance. If there is going to be no re examination to be done by you, then, of course, just simply state that there are no further questions and no re examination that you wish to on the taking the circumstances. The court then has opportunity thereafter to ask questions on if a witness is not a party than to ask the judge them for permission to release the witness in North Circumstances to unite with him to go. So that's the position there. It's just a position with reexamination and then we've got the position with closing submissions. So closes submissions are there to sum up your case on some up the matter. And this is where if you were taking copious notes doing examination, Chief on cross examination and those notes, particularly of additional evidence or particular points of evidence that the client was given, could then be used to enable you to prepare your closing submissions on your closing speech. So the closing submissions were used them to sum up the case on also to really highlight the favorable parts of the evidence in your client's favor, on also to comment on the rest of the evidence, with the region really minimizing the damage that may have been done in the circumstances. Also, the closing speech is very important to enable, according to be invited to really make a decision on the order order, start being sorted. The circumstances and this is where it's sometimes very important to be able to set out the particular elements of law that you invited according to consider, in deciding what order to make that this is where, when you are before the court, it's very important when you are using case law and statute to be familiar with that, to be able to refer to court to that in the circumstances. At the same time, some judges would not need reminding and may not wish to be reminders to what avarice elements of law are on. Therefore, that's where you have to be very careful about patronizing the court in spelling out what of various elements of law. Haven't said that sometimes judges may want your opinion on certain elements of law, which is absolutely fine. Sometimes judges may ask you whether they have jurisdiction, for example, to carry out any particular stepped up that may wish to be coming up, for example, which is absolutely understandable. That's where you can give, of course, your legal opinion on those matters going forward. One of the other aspects, of course, is in family cases. We do have more more than Dickinson person, of course, family cases, and therefore it's very important to bear in mind the case law has developed and also the litigation in person guidance as of June 2015. So this case of three C due process This Court of Appeal case, for example, is very important on this. Emphasizes wonder key things about ensuring that when you do have a litigant in person in mind and making sure that you do explain the various options to mark or, for example, if they all say the respondent and also making sure when you are drafting that you order love, it would a little contemptuous the mind. So they're written in a way where the order order directions off a clear, avoiding as much legalese as possible. And this is where there was this litigants in person guidance that was issued in June 2015. This is practical advice to lawyers and litigants in person on this guidance was issued by the bark Hands off. Silex does a chance Institute of legal executives and also the Law Society Onda. It sets out some very useful and important guidance both from lawyers and auto litigants in person when you can get advocacy. So in particular, one of the key things dis emphasizes is that when you're using template towards when you're drafting orders When you using standard forms, there must be as much life as possible and with a litigant in person in mind. And many of you will know that the standard orders were mentioned in part one. Off this advocacy course, doors do have to litigant in person in mind so that some of the draft orders are designed specifically politicals in person. So one example of where you need to ensure that you do use template orders on terminology in a way where it's free of legalese Israel's and putting something along the lines that a document needs to be filed and served. For example, one should be putting in the order something along the lines that a litigant in person, for example, is to send a copy to off that documented the other parties. Legal obscenity. But whatever dressing is on also send a copy to the court office idea dress studies so as to certainly make it more clearer as to what they are today was opposed to using words at such as file and save at, for example. Now, as I mentioned earlier, very, very important for the lawyer to be able to praise. The court has two updates and changes the law. Both case launched battery provisioned, and as an advocate, you're called a conduct duties that I mentioned in the first session of such that you do need to keep the court and yourself, of course, praised off legal developments. And just like anything that really would deal with in life. One of the key things I often find this little but often works particularly well, keeping up to date with the law. So very, very important to read elements of law a little bit every week so as to keep yourself updated. And it will put in a very good position and to know what's changed and what's different and what it also does. Of course, it keeps you updated, makes you a lot more confident in what you're doing on and to be able to address questions put to you by opponents and also body judiciary. So often in family law figure import, there's various online publications that some of you may want to read. There's the Bailey website, for example, which contains at the various, uh, certainly case law under various reports off judicial decisions. That's very important documentation to read. There's various legal press, for example, its various newspapers. You just need a system whereby you are consulting certain publications regularly. I or suggested people maybe about half now a week whereby Dale certainly reading something nude and learning something new. Because if you imagine if you did that regularly without fail every week, then that would put you and could stead going forward. When it comes to learning matters on And, of course, being able to keep up to date with things, you find that the more you keep updated, the more you aware of case law developments and stash supervision, the more you have to use that no one in your negotiations both when you're drafting on. Also, as I mentioned in your advocacy as well at court. So for a very important to keep up with caseload developments, statutory instruments and also updates and changes to fund the procedure, rooms and amendments, for example, as well as the public funny regulations as well as the professional conduct duties that I mentioned. And this is where sometimes you may find that you may well get nervous at court with opponents at court, and you may feel that unit a disadvantage because you may feel that you are not as experienced as the other. Here is that court. For example. This is a key point of anxiety, which certainly a lot of people are felt. And I have felt also on one way to really deal with this is think of it as, in a way, being a learner driver in the sense that was a linen driver. When you're driving, you are off course and touch to access and drive in the role justice, much as anybody else in the same rules apply to you as they do to any other a lawyer qualified drivers. So the same applies to advocates. You have rights of audience to appear for border courts, depending on which court European before and you're entitled to be there. You entitled to make your submissions. You entirely use the law as you see fit on bond to be up to really profess your point. Just because you may be less experienced on your opponent, it doesn't mean that they are right and you're wrong. Of course, each case has to be decided on the facts and also on the application of the law on and people will have their own interpretation of Lord. Just because you're more experience doesn't mean that your interpretation is necessarily correct On the other ones is, of course, the golden rule applies here, which is treat others how you would wish to be treated in these circumstances. That then begs me onto acting for parties and different types of proceedings. So when we're looking at care proceedings, for example, if you're acting for parents in the care case, for example, then when you're at court very, very important to ensure that when you're acting for parents you are managing expectations. It's very important that you do explain to your payment client in a digestible and easily accessible manner. Various, complex state. Our concepts explain to them what fresh old means. Explain to know what fact finding means. Explain to him what a placement order is. A special guarding support what the agency decision maker is, who that person is explained to them like, say, what special Ganesh borders are. These are very difficult, constant legal concepts, sometimes to explain in a a simple way, and that's why very, very important to be able to explain these things and also managing expectations that court. It may be that the client doesn't fully appreciate the problems that they are having and therefore trying to explain to them that sometimes they are other ways of resolve the matter other than what they are currently thinking. And, sure, you've set out the merits of the case with your client and the factors which go against their case, so your client may wish to oppose the application, but tell them about the risks of that. What may happen unconscious. Be conscious of the fact that your client, maybe you need to be referred to, for example, due to, say, lady disabilities for additional support, whether it's through an advocate of intermediary, for example, if there is an issue of capacity, for example, is there need to seek a litigation friend and is there need to make your foe to the officials list of, for example, if declined to relax litigation capacities? That is those aspects, making sure, as we mentioned earlier, that documents filed on time and emphasizing how important it is for your client to give you proper instructions which fully reflect their case and to ensure that this is them filed on time making sure your client understands what it would mean to give evidence, what it means to be cross examined and also examination in chief in that regard. So again very, very important to emphasize those points, then you're dealing with other types off applications as well. So, for example, when you're acting for, say, acting force had a local thought in a care case, for example, then pay important at the social worker understands to me to ensure that they comply with getting the central dates, such as dates for plenty meetings, adoption ponies in medical dates, looked art review dates. Make sure that they get decisions from, say, the agents. A decision maker on also, therefore making sure that all of this fits within the timetable. If you're acting for, say, a child in the care case, for example, so therefore often you'll be taking instructions on the Children's guardian, for example, making sure that even not a guardian is a professional new one right. They would still require assistance and advice on the law. So therefore telling them off updates and a law changing that the law which particularly affect them, for example, making sure that they are kept updated for changes and your price accordingly. Make sure that you have discussed with the Guardian the various legal issues that involved various options that may be available and the steps that the court may take in that regard. And this is where sometimes the Guardian may require you to clarify certain issues with the other parties. For example, before they were to conclude their investigations of filed a report. For example, on when you're dealing with Children, person is generally the wealth of a child is paramount in most applications on delay will be prejudicial to chance welfare. And therefore, just because you might have a professional in court, who is your like your client, whether it's the garden or whether it's a social worker, for example, you know that maybe experts in their own right they, too, understandably can on often will be nervous as well. So you need to ensure that you're protecting them in that regard by making sure that they are fully prepared for the hearing, making sure that other parties do not aggressively cross examined them. You're entitled to suggest that if an appropriate questions have been asked and put them doing cross examination that dogs are attracted, for example, on, Of course, the same principle applies when you're acting for, say, apparent, to make sure that you are protecting them at court when we are being cross examined by the parties in that regard. Now, when it comes to finance cases in financial remedy proceedings again, part of what I mentioned is about managing expectations, making sure clients fully understand various legal terms. Do you understand, for example, what we mean by financial remedy periodical payments, a statue recharge, for example? Do you understand at the various concepts and the various options available in terms of maintenance Penney suit various options would relating to pensions, for example? Also, when it does come to giving evidence and going to court, does the client fully understand what the purpose of the FDR is the financial dispute resolution appointment? Do they understand that the judge will be there who will be playing a very active role in trying to assist the parties in reaching an agreement on They fought potentially using that here and get her without prejudice here with a view to facilitating agreement? Does your client understand that that's the purpose of the hearing, and therefore they need to really be as open as they possibly can to possibly to region on agreement. At that hearing, for example, so a lot of what you see with when you do not for Cassie when you're dealing with clients is making sure you are managing your client's expectations. So does your client understand, in the finance case, for example, a possible sharing of inheritance, for example, particularly when it's inheritance that was acquired before the marriage and therefore what may have gone on still remains as non marital assets. For example, does the client understand? Appreciate that non financial contributions are just as valid as financial, for example, and that can have an impact on what you'll be saying. A court in that regard on, um at the FDR are the financial dispute resolution, therefore making it clear to you client as to what the purpose of that particular hearing is so inclined, advises here instruction appropriately as to indications that the court has given us what they may be prepared to settle on or otherwise in those circumstances again, it comes back to some of those aspects. Now that then brings me on to certain particular types of hearings, for example, So when you're dealing with SE Children proceedings, for example, particularly care proceedings, then you do need to ask yourself is to whether it's necessary to that certainly contest a particular type of hearing. So when you're at court on, it's an interim care hearing, for example, you do need to ask yourself, Do I contest? And this is where First of foremost in my view and before you met your client. When you have read the papers and you've done your preparation, you do need to consider the evidence after or as a lawyer. Part of our role is to carry out a forensic analysis of the evidence and then to be a advisor, clients accordingly, as to the, uh, feasibility of contesting or otherwise. So, with that in mind if, for example, it's a case whereby, say you're acting for parent Andi, they are seeking to contest the making of the interim care water than you do need to ask yourself by looking at the evidence as to whether the local thought you have, for example, carried out appropriate inquirer's investigations, for example, so when it comes to matters over threshold Is there, for example, extrinsic evidence from side of schools, health visitors outside the police? Does it go towards demonstrating threshold in that regard or otherwise? If there's a level of cooperation, for example, between the parent and, said a local authority than with a working agreement or a written agreement? Suffice in the circumstances on this is where, rather on order being made would at least interventionist approach, such as a sane old or interim supervision order or, say, working agreement being put in place. Suffice appropriately, No circumstances again. This is not only imagine expectations, but also weighing up whether or not it's appropriate, actually contest a matter indoor circumstances. If you are going to be suggesting that your client that does offer on, say, a working agreement, for example, and it's very, very important to ensure that they do actually stick to the agreement, Of course, because, of course, foolishly so well done. A man to breach of the working group, which in turn could lead to possible removal, indoor circumstances and linked with that make you sort of for lord no water principle. For example, in Section one, subsection five off the Children activation nicer if there is 11 agreement than on order may not be necessary in the circumstances. So if it's not necessary, don't suggested a local authority or tentative message trying to result matter whether it's through no order. Whether it's through a supervision order, for example, on a disk would be relevant, particularly in those types of matters. Now. One of the other things is when you're looking to instruct experts, for example, So when you're doing your advocacy, as I mentioned, if the razor protocol, if there is a practice direction, which relates to what needs to be done in readiness for the here, and I need to comply with that. So when it comes to instructing experts, for example, you've got at 25 off the family procedures in particular, which sets out D position with the the fact that any application instruct on expert say in finance cases needs to be made in readiness for the first directions appointment in Children, private Children or cases by the federal. That's the first even dispute with religion appointment on in care cases by the first case manager hearing. So with that in mind, if you are turning apart these hearings on you are looking to instruct an expert very important to ensure that you have prepared your paperwork in advance in accordance with Part 25 on, you need to be clear about the happiness you to clear about the law so that if, for example, you see to instruct an expert saying Children proceedings, then often you may find out if you say you want which to instruct a psychologist, for example, a k a psychological assessment on mother. And this is where you would need to take the course through Section 13 subsection seven. Off the Children. Families like 2014. Self example. What other evidence is available? What information will this expert give, which is not currently available? Can I get this information to other means? What's gonna be impact on the child's on the timetable was the cost of the assessment. So with all those questions which to court is obliged to consider, that's why it's very, very important in advance that you prepare your paperwork. We set out in your position statement or Scalise managment Answer stores queries so that when you do you advocacy you are a lot more confident and going forward in being able to not only address those issues that are being raised, but also to be a potential compliance with the law. Staying with that, one of the other things when you are looking at instructing experts, for example, is say, you dealing with an application would say You're from mother, for example, and your seeking a residential assessment than is there need for viability assessment to be undertaken first and foremost, for example? So if so, then look at the costs associated with that historic will be cost element associated with that and that needs to be dealt with. Plus, timing is obviously very important, making sure that the application is launched in readiness for being heard within the reason appeared of time. So because otherwise, as you can appreciate delays prejudicial to the timetable in that regard. Now, when it comes to locals halted use of evidence. This is where where do we stand? Would hear, say, within Children. Proceedings here say is, of course, admissible. But it should be limited on. This is what a case of repay a child is 2013 Case comes into play in this particular case of Ri P emphasize the fact that This was 1/4 peal case, leaving judgment and done by Lady Justice Black. And this is where the court did say that the use of here say's, of course, of misspelling Children proceedings, but that direct evidence from a social worker it would have assisted in understanding the position wasn't really relying upon hearsay upon hearsay. In that regard, and sometimes less time can be used less unless time is using consuming. I consumed in calling witnesses in situations where they actually know what's happened because they were the direct persons involved, rather than unraveling layer upon layer off here site to search back to get an accurate record of actually what happened. So even though hearsay is admissible in Children proceedings, you can imagine that it should be off limited use in those circumstances. And staying with that in terms of evidence that there's the other case of Ri A a childish case of 2015 by the then president. Finally, divisions James Mumby on this was a case where, by his Lordship set out some of a very fundamental and important points when it comes to threshold for the Pips is off proceedings so that one of The key things that the president did indicate was that it is for the applicant and often in these cases, the local authority to prove on a balance of probabilities, the facts upon which it seeks to rely. So the plan is one of adoption. For example, there's a local authority to prove that nothing else will do, and the onus is very much upon them. I wonder. The other things is, of course, even though hearsay evidence is admissible, the problem is this could cause problems. If the apparent, for example, denies the allegations and therefore firsthand evidence is compelling and it's less open to cross examination in the circumstances. So it tolls always better to have first hand evidence, if possible in these types of situations, and tying in with that. One of the other things is that fair, very important to ensure that when one is dealing with satisfying threshold, for example, that one has to establish that the a trumpet ability point in that. For example, if one relies upon the fact that say a mother takes drugs, for example, in one has to shoulder impact that has on the chart, for example, so very important to be able to emphasize that. Be clearing your submissions when you're making representations to which witnesses are needed and whether they go towards disposal. Threshold sometimes that something that lawyers sometimes do. You get wrong when you're dealing with child care cases. If the matter goes towards threshold, then you do need to ask yourself as to whether the threshold areas can be agreed. If that witness is no longer required, of course, because their shoulder determined or have been concluded, of course, that when it should not be called to give evidence in those circumstances now linked in with that, then we've got the position with some case law on advocacy generally under position with what if a judge, for example, in Trump's on advocate doing desks advocacy. So where does one stand there where this is what a case of Ri s Children Wnt comes into play on? But this was a 2014 case, and it was argued in this case that the judge did interrupt a proper flow of cross examination which affected, therefore our effective. The cross examination was on Lord Justice. Muqam referred to previous judgment in this case, in particular, referred to a previous case off Jones against National Coal Board, which was a previous case in 1975 were buying that case, Lord Justice Denning in particular, or stating that it is for the advocate to state their cases fairly and strongly as they can without undue interruption. Onda Judges, part is, is ready to only ask themselves questions off witnesses. Which ness. So your left up skill on to see that the advocates behaved themselves on to keep to rules laid down by the law and also to exclude irrelevant factors and discourage repetition. Also, to make sure that that the advocates are making the points that they need to make and really want, condemn assessed a worth on an to make up their mind doesn't judges to where the truth lies. If the judge have a goes beyond this, then this is where Lord Justice Denning, in this case off National Coal Board, said that this is where the judge hasn't dropped a mantle of a judge and assumes the role of an advocate on a change does not become well in that regard. So you can see very, very important that that case highlights at some of the key things as far as what they're all of the judges and position. So particularly in relation to interrupting advocates in that regard. The judgment went on to say that a judge is entitled, but he's not bantering to be not on the stage of witnesses evidence, if they feel by reason, off the technical nature of the evidence. Otherwise in that regard. Cross examining counsel, however, would not be at a great disadvantage if they are prevented from falling a line of enquiry which which they were wanted to, for example, admissions from a witness. But excessive judicial interruption weakens the effectiveness of cross examination in relation to the aspects on discontent cause difficulties. And they thought this was wonder key points that was being raised in this case off. Yes, because of the continuous judge's interpretation and interventions. Distinct crossed lines are at the party that didn't make a complaint, that they had not been able to be able to put the case at the court. So you can see one of the one of the points there which therefore was being raised. Okay, now what's the position and also when one is think calling evidence and in particular. There is a need to ensure the judge needs to ensure that there is a level of fairness when lawyers are representing their clients in court and this was the point that was raised in the case off region. This case off 2015 on that leaning judgment here, was handed down also by Lady Justice Black. Now, this is a case which involved care proceedings on the council for the mother did arrive later court about now late due to the Vape all weather conditions Judge referred to lightness off the council. Throughout the hearing, comments were made about it. Battiston in particular, criticized the money which the case was conducted. The judge continued to criticize and constantly interrupt the council, even mid flow on this happened several ties into cross examination that was being undertaken by the barrister. That led to the appeal on the basis that they boast to his arguing that there had been an unfair criticism made about the later rival court bottle lawyer on. In fact, at the quarter of people took to be lady justice, Black in particular, talked of you that yes, of course, they are pressures on the family justice system, which meant that judges need to be robust. Sometimes interventions are necessary. But here there were constant references to the fact that the lawyer was late. That put pressure on a council, which really created impression that they were not been given a fair chance to actually put their case to the court. They can see at importance off that judgment now. As I mentioned earlier, skeleton arguments are very important document which will be prepared when you are dealing with matters. And I would suggest that when you do get the opportunity and when there is an opportunity for filing station arguments that you should do these, it's very argument. If it's used, it would enable them to set out your submissions that you intend to make the court in a written format. But this is where you're going to be, setting out quite specifically particular references to particular law. Both case lost astri provisions on otherwise, when you are prepared, skates, monuments is very, very important that you do so attack quite comprehensively. Their various legal issues involves us to put a legal argument before the court on shouldn't set out details of law. So when I've done skating arguments have set out a bit of background about the nature of the application, what the application is before the court, what the dispute is on the sub stances dispute for what you're doing. A skeleton argument then I would, than what I've done is I've set out the particular relevant constitute constituent parts of the law, whether it's case law statute, provision, the necessary paragraph numbers in the case law, for example, the relevant statutory provision, whether it's primary legislation or otherwise. I know one of Dhoni's have been applied that the facts of the case to then give my opinion is divided. Court should go with their suggestion that I have so it's very, very important when you are doing discussion argument to be able to not only correctly and accurately set out the relevant law to make sure it's off course updated, and it's relevant on its fully reference. And then secondly, to be able to ensure that you are fully referring to that for the purposes of Cross, referring that and applying it to facts of the case to come up with a view. So it's very important to ensure that the law you have phone to is clear on its fully referenced. So if you are really relying upon case law, for example, in your studies fragments, it's very important to full citation and to enable a court and and the other parties to be made to refer to that case law a za profit and also very important to be able to ensure that you have put in the judge's bundled the full case citation and all sort of full judgment which has been printed so as to be made available for them and therefore which have a case law authorities were referring to in your state in arguments favor. Important to ensure the unmarked copies off this case law on a four copy off this than I made available and put in the bundle alongside the skating arguments for consideration and by the courts. They should have a bundle put together with the It's catching Argument North, other relevant statute and case law provisions which are associating with that. And it's very important to ensure that the case law on the statute provision that you are referring to and you're doing copies off his unmarked when he's putting the bundle when you are a friend case law, it's very important to ensure that specific elements of the case law I refer to this could be done by referring to the case by a particular page on also the actual reference sort of paragraph number. So if, for example, you phone to paragraph 76 or particular case than very important to emphasize that particular paragraph and also actually setting out word for word, what was actually said in that paragraph on being able to apply dented the facts of your case to set out why it's relevant and how it's important. So once the relevant case law has been set out as well, it is statutory provisions. It's important. Another I mentioned to apply to the facts of the case so sometimes something along the lines that you therefore contend on behalf of the party concerned or submit that case fits within that case Law is important. Set out the case and how it applies to the particular fax and then to give you a commentary on that when you are propensity Asian arguments, make sure you are, of course, up to date with the case law. Make sure you have done your research first on that you have a good understanding of law. Once he have prepared escape mark, keep it as a precedent because the chances are you probably need to use it again. Perhaps some tweaking at a later case at a later date on this wouldn't save you a lot of time in really drafting another document if you're already prepared. A previous schedule argument with a lot of the relevant case law within that on one of the other things is just getting cases ready for finding of fact hearings, for example, when you are getting cases ready involving, say, cases in, say, public law Case of private law cases for fact findings. Very important to have a schedule of allegations pull together, which sets out numerically various allegations and where you cross reference to the evidence where that does allegations are referred to on and to be able to put, but by way of submissions or live evidence to the court. So when you are getting a fact matter ready for fact finding, saying a public Children or case, particularly on cases where there's allegations as to injuries that charter sustained and you're trying to determine how does injuries were caused do in terms of evidence, number of key things to bear in mind. Firstly, few acting as a solicitor for the parents, for example, fe very important if it's a case involving medical injuries. For example, take a detail note formed up parents has in preparing their statements. So taking a detailed history of medical history of the parents and also the child getting in ideas to any illnesses in the family, only diseases on descript be very important, cause this may explain possible cause ations ERM and has been cases with Children of sustained head injuries. For example, on this is where them used to be consideration often, whether or not there was for saying Richmond D deficiency, for example, you could lead to Ricketts, for example, so looking at any pre existing disposition, for example, it's very important for history. But taken off the food at the child eats. This is very important to get a chronology of what they had, what their every day activities like there may be issues off. Example, allergies or intolerance is maybe shoes over. Therefore, malnutrition, for examples of those matters, would need to be looked at. Also, when you're dealing with these types of matters, it's good to have a good understanding of the medical issues involved in preparing for fact finding hearing. So make sure you're clear about the various medical terms don't use so that you can understand what boards are, particularly when you're cross examining and doing examination. Chief of medical experts so that you to understand what the various terms are when your point dulls to the witness in the witness box, and also very important to get the medical records of the child more sort of family, which will include GP records and also hospital records. Also on sometimes, when you're dealing with a contested hearing on its one bread charter sustained injuries, for example, very important to get your hands on, say the ambulance notes. In terms of the thing actual ambulance crew who attended at the scene, sometimes to get the notes for the initial 999 core, for example, in that regard, transcripts of please could be very helpful to try and piece together what may have got on went on, and also copier Charles Red Book. Make sure that's available to look at what tests were done. What investigations were done in two circumstances. What was done, what was recommended in that regard. Okay, so you can see today have spent favorite time with you going through a number of issues. It's Fars advocacy, particularly the second part off decision we have been looking at calling evidence, in particular, preparing for according live evidence. We've looked at examination in chief cross examination, particular on also reexamination. So they looked at that were also looked at the position with managing expectations. When you are dealing with the clients were looked at the position with dealing with litigants in person, also making sure that you are compliant litigants in person guidance since it fires that is concerned and also some case law have looked at specifically insofar as the position with the duty DOT judge has towards advocates When
Webinar
Slides
3062 Users
171 Courses
157 Reviews
