Between 2006 and 2012, a series of linked studies were carried out into the nature of proceedings, involving an assessment of both the processes and people involved. Led by Judith Masson, Professor of Socio-Legal Studies from the Bristol Law School, the three studies analysed the data, observed proceedings and conducted interviews with professionals and parents.

The first study, conducted between November 2006 and May 2007 and funded by the Ministry of Justice and Department for Education, involved a quantitative review of 386 cases relating to children and families seen across ten court areas. Major differences were highlighted in the ways in which different courts handled cases. Professor Masson’s research team also found that owing to serious flaws in the way cases were transferred between courts, some cases were counted twice, thereby inflating the number of cases recorded in official judicial statistics. Using costs data from the Legal Services Commission, Professor Masson’s team also demonstrated that the cost of each case rose with the duration of each case. 

In a further study, researchers observed over 100 court hearings between July 2008 and January 2010, including nearly all the hearings for 16 cases, to examine the legal representation offered to disadvantaged parents whose children were the subject of care proceedings. As part of the study – which provided the most detailed insights in over 20 years – researchers conducted over 60 interviews with solicitors, barristers, judges and magistrates’ legal advisers.

Professor Masson and colleagues discovered that rather than proceedings being managed by the judge according to court rules and practice directions, the lawyers involved largely determined how the case would proceed. These findings exposed the failure of reforms introduced in 2008, and showed a damaging lack of professional continuity from the judiciary, lawyers and social workers. All these factors contributed to the extended length of proceedings, delayed decisions and increased costs to legal aid.

Between April 2010 and June 2012, the way in which different local authorities prepare care proceedings was examined. Research showed that while the formal pre-proceedings process succeeded in diverting cases from court, for cases that did go into legal proceedings, the courts appeared to take no account of the pre-proceedings stage. The aim of shortening case length was therefore not achieved. 

“We were able to provide a complete picture of care proceedings, a picture that wasn’t available to policymakers and practitioners beforehand,” says Professor Masson. “Our research made it clear that reforming care proceedings requires changes in court culture and practice as well as new procedures.”

Collectively, the research played a pivotal role in the Family Justice Review of 2011, commissioned by the Ministry of Justice, the Department for Education, and the Welsh Assembly Government. The Review was aimed at ensuring care proceedings meet their aims of protecting children and vulnerable adults from risk of harm. 

The recommendations contained in the Review relied heavily on the empirical evidence provided by Professor Masson’s work. They called for a more rigorous approach to data collection, judicial continuity, further training to support better judicial case management, and greater engagement with service users. As a result, the length of time taken to complete care proceedings has reduced (from 55 weeks to 37 weeks in 2013). Legislation now provides that cases should be completed in 26 weeks.

Professor Masson was later appointed as specialist adviser to a Parliamentary Select Committee set up to oversee the reforms and legislative changes. She was subsequently invited to give a seminar to the civil servants supporting the Review team, and was called on to assess the draft proposals taken forward in the Review.