Standards push in Family Court

The Family Court is facing a fresh shakeup, with Principal Judge Peter Boshier insisting on more formality to ensure it - and the legal orders it makes - are respected.

Judge Boshier wants a higher standard of evidence presented to the courts, and has decided lawyers will be asked to stand, not sit, when they address judges.

He has already applied to the Government to lift a legislative ban on judges wearing gowns in the Family Court.

The changes he has outlined are intended to improve the authority of the Family Court and to prevent its orders, including those protecting children, being flouted.

But it is also understood Judge Boshier wants to strengthen the performance of professionals, including lawyers, social workers and court staff, to avoid "embarrassing lapses and delays".

The court has already seen significant change in the last year, with a new law opening up proceedings which used to be held behind closed doors.

Lawyers are believed to be divided on the pursuit of more formality, which is at odds with the softer, less adversarial, design for the court when it was set up 25 years ago.

New Zealand Law Society family law chairman Simon Maude said "divergent" views on the judge's approach had been revealed when members were surveyed about a request they stand rather than sit when addressing the bench.

He said there were both pros and cons to the changes. "We would always want to make sure the court doesn't lose its specialist nature."

Mr Maude said lawyers were "at one" with Judge Boshier in his search for higher standards of evidence, and for less acceptance of hearsay evidence.

In a speech in Wellington yesterday, Judge Boshier said that, when established, the Family Court was allowed to receive "any" evidence which might not be heard in other courts.

"At what point, do we say there is an honourable limit to the admissibility of second-hand, unoriginal and sometimes questionably sourced material?"

There was a need for the Family Court to be seen as a "mainstream" court.

"I would like there to be no perception at all that Family Court orders, when issued, can be negotiated, avoided or informally modified.

"This is not a 'blast from the past' ... but a reminder that a court above all requires authority if it is to be effective."

He was concerned some people before the court thought it was an extension of mediation services and failed to grasp it had strict, defined powers.

His view was a court which was too informal and too fluid with its boundaries might not be conducting itself completely professionally.

Other changes understood to be contemplated are the introduction of an official coat of arms for each courtroom, and more space and security in courtrooms.

Any changes are likely to affect adults involved in family cases. Children are not usually exposed to court proceedings.

Court work

* Between July 2004 and last June, 66,499 substantive applications were filed in the Family Court. Most of its work involved children.

* Most cases did not require a formal defended hearing. Of the 24,905 applications filed under the Guardianship Act 1968, only about 6 per cent required a court order.