The President of the Family Division, has published further guidance on the drafting of orders to try to alleviate the pressures on the Court.
He has said that the first order in proceedings should always be drafted in full, as per the earlier 2018 Practice Guide, but for the interim hearings he said indicated as follows:
The minimum required content in an order following a second or subsequent interim hearing will be:
i. A recital of who attended and their representation;
ii. A recital of the issues determined at the hearing;
iii. A record of any agreement or concession made during the hearing;
iv. A recital of the issues that remain outstanding; and
v. The text of any orders that were made.
The final hearing will always require a full order.
It seems to me that as long as parties don't start cutting corners or leaving salient points out of orders then this is a helpful way to save both time and paper. It will require lawyers to acknowledge that practice directions apply even if not expressly set out in full. It is not so helpful to the litigants in person who may need to be told what PD27 means and what the statement of truth is. I'm sure further guidance will follow.
"[T]he Family Court is currently experiencing a very high number of children cases. In these circumstances, I have reluctantly come to the view that the detriment, in terms of time taken to prepare lengthy narrative orders after every hearing, outweighs the benefit that such orders bring.