THERE IS “undue deference” shown to judges by lawyers practising family law, according to Alan Shatter, TD and family law specialist.
He was speaking at the launch of the Irish Family Law Precedents Serviceby Ciara Matthews yesterday. The book was launched by Mr Justice Henry Abbott.
“The administration of family law and, in particular, our separation and divorce laws can best be described as shambolic,” he said.
“Out of concern not to alienate members of the judiciary or out of concern to ensure no litigant’s case is prejudiced, some lawyers remain silent about these problems and I believe are unintentionally showing an ‘undue deference’ to the judiciary which is contrary to the public interest.”
Among the problems he identified were a too regular turnover of judges dealing with family law in the Dublin Circuit Court. “It is perfectly possible that over a period of 12 to 18 months between three to five circuit judges may consider different or similar issues in the one case involving the same estranged litigants,” he said.
Also, each judge has their own subjective approach to family cases and there is a lack of consistency in the manner in which interim issues are addressed and in final decisions made.
“As a consequence, it is very difficult for legal practitioners, no matter how experienced, to accurately predict the outcome of cases and on occasion to advise estranged parties on the wisdom of settlement proposals made in individual cases,” he said. Too frequently, decisions are made without reasoned judgments being delivered and clear explanations given by a judge, he added.
Mr Shatter also called for media access to the family law courts on condition that the anonymity of the litigants was preserved. “However, no one should regard such reporting as the panacea for the current inadequacies of the family law system. Should judges continue to fail to deliver reasoned judgments for decisions made, court reporting will be of limited value,” he said.