No one fronts up to oppose Collins’ Family Court Proceedings Bill

I think you will find there will be many submissions in respect of this bill from lawyers. The reason for non-attendance at the meeting is more likely to be busy workloads and that lawyers have the ability to draft a submission without attending a meeting. For what it is worth the Family Law Section is specifically asking members to draft their own submissions with their own point of view and not advocating a stock submission.

Whilst there are some parts of this bill that I am in agreement with (for example the modification of the role of lawyer for child), there are other parts that I believe will not promote justice or fairness in the resolution of family disputes.

I will be making a submission.

Disclosure time – I am a lawyer who practices in the area of family law. However my motivation for my submission against parts of this bill, in particular s7A (which prohibits legal representation in Courts except in specific exceptions), is not about income protection. Very little of my income comes from Care of Children proceedings and I do not believe that the bill if it were passed in it’s current form it would effect my income particularly dramatically. My concern is instead for the parties to Court proceedings and the children whose lives would be the subject of such proceedings.

Lawyers play a valuable role in the Family Court system. Advice from and/or negotiation by competent counsel can mean that matters never go to Court in the first place, or if matters do continue, that they are resolved before the need for a hearing. When self-litigants are involved alternate dispute resolution is far more difficult. Lawyers can work through the party’s position by providing objectivity and reality testing what the party is seeking. We ensure that their evidence is relevant and complies with the rules of evidence. I have acted against many self-litigants and they simply do not have the objectivity to produce appropriate evidence. Having all parties self-represented will place a huge burden on Judges.

Having representation levels the playing field for vulnerable parties. Imagine a victim of domestic violence having to represent themselves against the perpetrator of the violence to decide on the care of their children. There is a lot of misconceptions in family law about parents rights and responsibilities and without advice vulnerable parties will be bullied into accepting outcomes that are unfair and more importantly that are not in the best interests of the children.

I understand the reason Judith Collins has proposed these changes – if no one can have lawyers then they don’t have to provide legal aid which in turn saves money. My concern however is that saving money in the short term is likely to have huge social costs in the long term.