Case No. ZE23C50115

28.Everyone working in the Family Justice System is aware of the pressures the courts are experiencing at present. 29.These pressures are illustrated by the fact that both ICO hearings in these proceedings were listed around the edges of the normal court sitting day: the first at 4pm on the Thursday, and the second at 1pm on the Friday. My tiredness and frustration during the first hearing perhaps meant that my tone was sharper than it needed to be, for which I apologise. Part of the reason for delivering this judgment in writing, after the end of the hearing, was to ensure that the problems set out here did not become a distraction at the second hearing on the Friday, and that the focus at that hearing remained on V and the interim arrangements for him. 30.The very clear message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, is that the system can only function if there is a “radical recalibration of the resources, in terms of the time and the number of hearings, that can be applied to any given case.1” The message to “Make Every Hearing Count” was repeated in January of this year through the re-launch of the Public Law Outline2. 31.Every ineffective hearing has an impact on the system, by reducing the time available for other cases. 32.The unpredictable nature of family cases means that the occasional ineffective hearing is unavoidable. That makes it all the more important that professionals (both social workers and lawyers) do not compound the problem by rendering hearings ineffective through a lack of proper preparation. 33.In any case where a court has delivered judgment, particularly where findings have been made, the judgment will be the starting point for future decision-making, and therefore any account of the background set out in a social work statement or other document should take the judgment as its primary source. There is no point in trawling through old documents to put together a history when the facts have already been determined, and to do so is likely to create a confusing and misleading picture. 34.I recognise that the fact that an allegation has been made, even if it has not been found proved, may continue to be of relevance, and so there may be a need to refer to it in a subsequent document (the unproven sexual abuse allegations in this case provide a good example of such a situation, because although those allegations were not found proved, the fact that they were made was and is relevant to the nature of the parental relationship). However if that happens, the author of the document must make the status of the allegation clear. 35.As I have said, there is nothing new in any of this, and this judgment should not be cited as “guidance”. The relevant principles are readily available from many, far more authoritative sources. 1 ‘Make Every Hearing Count’: Case Management Guidance in Public Law Cihldren Cases, March 2022. 2 https://www.judiciary.uk/courts-and-tribunals/family-law-courts/re-launch-of-the-public-law-outline-plo/