Problems arising from lack of representation and translation services
highlighted in financial remedies case
Mr Justice Holman permits woman to appeal where
both parties acted in person
Mr Justice Holman has granted permission for a
woman to appeal a financial remedies order after a lack of representation of
either party and of an appointment of an interpreter led to a decision by a
deputy district judge which was objectively unfair.
In Azizi v Aghaty [2016] EWHC 110 (Fam) Mr
Justice Holman said:
"It may seem that, in what follows, I am being
critical of the deputy district judge who heard this matter ... I mean no
criticism of her at all. She was faced, as so often occurs since the almost
wholesale abolition of Legal Aid, with two unrepresented litigants in person.
The first language of neither of them is English, and ...the wife in particular
has difficulties with that language. In those difficult circumstances the
deputy district judge clearly did her best ..."
The deputy district judge had concluded:
"I find that not only did the wife enter into
a bigamist [sic] marriage, but that the husband was innocent of the fact ...
The fact of her bigamy and dishonest evidence will be reflected in my
order."
Holman J insisted that an interpreter should be
present at all further hearings in the matter but acknowledged, as noted by
counsel, that even where there is such a direction interpreters sometimes do
not attend.
31/1/16
