Financial Remedy Orders – an end to intervenor problem

In Goldstone v Goldstone [2011] EWCA Civ 39, [2011] 1 FLR 1926 the Court of Appeal identified a gap in the FPR as to joining parties (intervenors) to aplications for financial remedy orders under FPR Part 9. It appears that the Family Procedure Rules Committee have decided to add a new rule (provisionally 9.26B) to address this.

The court can exercise the new powers under it’s own initiative or at the application of a party, such application to be made under the Part 18 procedure.

The rule will provide – along the same lines as CPR r19.2 – that the court may direct that a person (or body) be added to proceedings for a financial remedy if:

(a) it is desirable to add the new party so that the court can resolve all matters in dispute in the proceedings; or
(b) there is an issue involving the new party and an existing party which is connected to the matters in dispute and it is desirable to add the new party so that the court can resolve that issue.

The rule will also provide for a party to be removed where no longer desirable for them to be a party to the proceedings.

Joanna Shaw

Joanna practices across matrimonial and family law, property matters, housing and employment law.

Leave a comment

Filed under Family

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.