SoS letter to CJ – Family Court at risk of collapse

THE Assembly of Southern Lawyers (ASL) has written to Chief Justice Ivor Archie, in his capacity head of the Judicial and Legal Service Commission (JLSC), warning that the Family Court system is at risk of collapse.

In the letter, ASL president Saira Lakhan described widespread dysfunction in the Masters’ courts.

She said there were excessive delays in non-contentious matters, adjournments without notice or explanation and long wait times even in urgent domestic violence cases.

“It is with the utmost gravity that we wish to formally bring to the attention of your good office, the Judicial and Legal Service Commission, a deeply concerning and escalating situation in the Family Courts...specifically regarding the conduct, docketing practices and accountability mechanisms, or lack thereof, concerning the Masters of the Family Court.”

The letter provided instances where uncontested divorce petitions, some with no children or property involved, were scheduled for hearings more than a year after filing. In one such case, a matter filed in March 2025 was set to be heard in April 2026.

Lakhan said even when attorneys requested earlier listings, they were met with further delays, often without reason.

Of grave concern, the ASL president said, was that interim protection orders under the Domestic Violence Act are frequently listed far beyond the mandated 21-day period.

In one instance, she said, a return date was reportedly scheduled more than a year after the initial hearing, leaving a parent without access to a child and applicants at risk without timely court intervention.

“There is an erosion of litigant confidence, professional burnout and the prolonged suffering of litigants,” the letter said.

Lakhan said emotional distress and reputational harm are growing among both clients and attorneys. Some matters are vacated the day before their scheduled hearings, with no explanation or timely rescheduling, the ASL president claimed.

'black hole for family law'

Lakhan questioned the original rationale for increasing the deployment of masters to ease judicial backlogs, pointing out that judges, with heavier case loads, appear to manage their dockets more efficiently than masters handling less complex matters.

She said one attorney described the situation as a “black hole for family law.” She also said it had become a system that is “less responsive, less transparent, and significantly more delayed,” calling on the JLSC to immediately implement several reforms. These include an independent investigation into the masters’ performance, publication of a formal docketing policy, enforcement of judicial performance standards, creation of a transparent escalation mechanism, and formal stakeholder consultations.

“We are now faced with a system that is, in key respects, less responsive, less transparent, and significantly more delayed than what previously obtained.

“This lack of transparency causes not only frustration but suspicion – suspicion that the docketing system is arbitrary, unmonitored, and unaccountable. In an environment where justice must not only be done but seen to be done, the opacity surrounding the scheduling and prioritisation of matters is deeply troubling in the Masters courts.”

Lakhan said there was an emotional impact on litigants.

“We have received numerous reports of litigants breaking down in tears while visiting their respective attorney’s office, where they suffered documented psychological regressions so much so that they had to resume trauma counselling as a direct result of the last-minute adjournments and unexplained procedural delays.

“ These are not minor administrative inconveniences. They are cruel setbacks inflicted by a court that is supposed to be a place of relief and resolution.”

Lakhan added, “The existing state of affairs stands in direct contradiction to the ideals of efficient, timely and people-centred justice. What we are witnessing instead is institutional inertia, where delay is normalised, and urgency is systematically disregarded.”

The ASL advanced recommendations for the JLSC to urgently consider and implement. The ASL has suggested the commissioning

Of an independent investigation into the performance and administrative operations of the Masters at the Family Court.

This investigation, it said, should specifically address persistent delays in the listing of matters, deficiencies in docket management, the timeliness and responsiveness of masters to file applications, and their compliance with statutory timelines under the Family and Children Division Act and the Domestic Violence Act.

It also suggested the development of a formal docketing policy for the Masters’ Court and the Family Court divisions.

“This policy should establish a clear criterion for scheduling, transparent guidelines for triaging urgent and routine applications, and incorporate anonymised performance data to promote accountability and predictability across all jurisdictions of the Family Court.”

Establish code of conduct for masters

The ASL also suggested the enforcement of judicial performance standards and a code of conduct specifically tailored to the role of the masters.

“These standards should include measurable benchmarks for hearing timeliness, efficiency in case management,

responsiveness to parties, and professional conduct, with meaningful oversight and consequences for persistent non-compliance.”

Among its recommendations is for the JLSC to establish a transparent administrative review and escalation mechanism to address matters that remain unlisted or unresolved beyond statutory or reasonable time frames.

“This mechanism should be accessible to both practitioners and litigants and it must allow for the formal escalation of delayed cases, particularly in uncontested applications, consent orders, and domestic violence matters where procedural inertia causes real and ongoing harm.”

Finally, it wants formal stakeholder consultations with key professional bodies, including the Law Association, the ASL and the Family Law Association.

“These consultations should inform the design and implementation of long-overdue reforms and ensure that solutions are developed collaboratively, to reflect the realities of court users, and uphold the public’s trust in the Family Court Division of the High Court of Justice.”

Lakhan made it clear the ASL was not seeking to impugn the integrity or good faith of all judicial officers.

“We acknowledge the dedication of many judicial officers who manage their duties with diligence and compassion. However, judicial independence must coexist with accountability. Transparency, performance evaluations, and stakeholder engagement are essential to uphold the integrity of the judiciary and maintain public confidence.

“We urge the Judicial and Legal Service Commission to address these issues with the urgency they demand to prevent a further erosion of public trust and to ensure the protection of vulnerable individuals seeking justice before the court.”

The letter was copied to the presidents of the Law Association and the Family Law Association.