The lack of a joined up approach to family law proceedings is part of a wider issue of accountability within the courts service which is causing harm to families and costing millions according to a damning report by the National Audit Office (NAO) into family courts.
With responsibility for family justice shared between the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), Department for Education (DfE), His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS), and the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) in England there is no single body accountable for overall performance, nor a shared understanding of what good looks like from the perspective of families and children.
That is the conclusion of a report into the performance of the family justice system which has identified over 4,000 children were in proceedings lasting nearly two years or more as of December 2024, despite the Government’s time limit of 26 weeks to resolve most care proceedings instigated by local authorities to protect a child from harm.
In 2024, there were 15,980 new public law cases and 51,473 new private law cases. While family courts have fared better that the crown courts as far as delays are concerned, cases continue to take too long. The backlog in the family courts has reduced by over a quarter since 2021; as of December 2024, there were 47,662 outstanding family court cases brought by local authorities (10,121) and families (37,541) related to the living and contact arrangements for children – down from a peak of 65,743 cases in August 2021.
In 2024 the average length of time of public law cases was 36 weeks; in private law the average was 41 weeks. The proportion of children waiting over a year for a public law case increased from 0.7% in January 2017 to 12% in December 2024 according to the NAO.
The report is critical of the lack of understanding around the cause of delays across the different services, further criticising the government established and ministerial-led Family Justice Board (FJB). A high turnover of ministers has led to ‘inconsistent political leadership… with the Board frequently refocusing its role and priorities.’
“The Family Justice Board (FJB) does not have an overall strategy to improve family justice although members have had a shared focus on reducing delays. The FJB has not articulated a cross-government vision for the future of family justice, what good looks like from the perspective of a child or the taxpayer, or how partners will work together to deliver that vision.”
The NAO’s report, which reviewed the findings of performance reviews undertaken by government bodies to identify reasons for delay and inefficiencies in family justice cases, identified more than 25 different issues, which vary across local areas and between different types of cases, including:
- Increased work required for each case
- Lack of capacity in all parts of the system
- Poor administration (32% of cases had at least one hearing cancelled before it took place, then had to be rearranged)
- Families not being adequately supported
This lack of understanding is costing families and tax payers millions, say the NAO, estimating the government spent more than £1.8bn in 2023-24 on family justice. Delays can lead to even further delays as evidence or assessments need to be updated, and costs grow. Between 2018 and 2022 average spending on legal aid for a case brought by a local authority doubled, from about £6,000 to about £12,000, mainly due to cases taking longer. This represents an annual increase of £314 million legal aid spending for these cases.
Laying its recommendations out the NAO say a system-wide assessment of the key factors driving poor performance and a better understanding of costs to deliver best value for money is needed.
“The government has a range of initiatives to improve family justice services for families and the number of children waiting for court decisions is reducing. But many cases still take too long to complete and further action is needed to remove the barriers to a more efficient system, including poor quality data and fragmented decision-making.”
says head of the NAO, Gareth Davies.
NAO recommend MoJ, DfE, HMCTS and Cafcass should consider
- clear and measurable objectives for better serving children and families and taxpayers;
- a system-wide assessment of key issues affecting performance;
- a review of ongoing and future initiatives to ensure work is joined up and addresses key performance issues; and
- review available support for families through court proceedings and assess opportunities for better support to those without legal representation and families more widely, including how to improve guidance for family court applicants
Commenting on the report Law Society president Richard Atkinson said:
“Our children and families need a fast and fair justice system. The NAO report reveals that while there have been improvements in reducing court backlogs, delays persist. When cases are resolved quickly, fewer complexities develop and fewer court applications are needed, reducing overall costs to the taxpayer.
“Cuts to legal aid, a vital public service, is a driving factor for the increase in the number of people who are forced to represent themselves in court. These cases take longer because often they involve deeply emotional issues for individuals who do not have legal experience, which increases the chances of going to a final hearing as they are less likely to know what a reasonable settlement looks like.
To allow for a better understanding of how the family courts are working and address problems effectively, robust data collection and data transparency is needed. Making sure there is a joined-up approach to gain a shared understanding of what good quality support looks like from a child’s point of view also remains essential. Court staff, judges and professionals all work extremely hard to get the best outcomes for the public, but the government needs to invest more and take a broader approach to make sure the justice system meets the needs of children and families.”
Improving family court services for children is available to review in full here.
One Response
There is a noticeable difference between Courts in Lancashire and the Courts further South. Lancashire do not seem to be impacted as much when dealing with children matters. Perhaps the southern Courts could learn a thing or two from Lancashire.