Login
More ‘substantive changes’ needed in family law report, LCA says
While the Law Council of Australia will support a number of the recommendations in the family law system’s second report, there are several findings that could both exacerbate the time spent in the system and overcomplicate disciplinary findings.
Naomi Neilson
The parliamentary joint select committee on Australia’s family law system tabled its second report earlier this week containing 29 recommendations that it hopes will address the failings under the current structure, including extensive delays, excessive legal costs, difficulty of enforcing court orders and timely resolutions.
Throughout the 29 recommendations, it similarly made reference to whether courts should be more adversarial, whether compliance around financial disclosure duties should be increased and how to ensure appropriate services are available.
“The majority of the issues are not new, and the committee acknowledges that there are significant initiatives being piloted by the family courts and the Australian government to address some of the more significant concerns,” Mr Andrews said.
The Law Council of Australia (LCA) said it particularly endorses the recommendation that the Australian government will increase funding to Legal Aid Commissions and community legal centres to “enable those services to boost their support for disadvantaged and vulnerable families within the family law system”.
It also welcomed the call for a greater focus on mediation and arbitration as well as a recommendation for additional registrars. However, it said there remains a “critical need” for an increase in the number of family law judges to hear complex matters.
“This can only occur with significant investments in the family law jurisdiction, for both judicial and non-judicial decision-makers,” the LCA said in a statement.
While it had mostly positive reviews of the second report, the LCA said it would like to see more substantive changes to the Family Law Act as it relates to children in family law matters and it would welcome the opportunity to work with the Parliament, including by reforming the current 42 steps used to determine a child’s best interests.
It also does not agree with the committee’s findings in relation to the need to further regulate legal fees in family law proceedings, including a proposed cap save for exceptional cases on fees for property matters of $50,000 or 10 per cent of the combined value of the parties’ identified property and superannuation.
The LCA said if this cap is invoked, litigants who reach any capped cost limit could become self-represented and take up more judicial time, which may increase delays.
“There are already a number of important protections in place for consumers in the legal system, with the profession subject to strong regulation in respect of costs and charges by various professional and regulatory bodies,” the LCA said. “Gross overcharging is a matter that is characterised as professional misconduct.”
Naomi Neilson
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
