By 
Success story
Ask him two questions in one breath and he answers the second and forgets the first. Press him, and he agrees just to make the pressure stop. A father in his thirties with autism described himself that way before his fact-finding hearing. A ground rules hearing then set how the mother’s lawyer could question him.
He consented to this account; we changed details that could identify him.
Afraid the judge would read his autism as lying
He applied for a child arrangements order when the mother stopped his overnight weekends with their six-year-old son. Her C1A form alleged that he took her car keys during an argument so she could not drive away. It also said he checked her bank account weekly and visited her work uninvited. He admitted taking the keys and disputed the rest, so the judge set down a fact-finding hearing.
He brought a ring binder of notes and this worry: “I don’t look at people when I talk, and my voice goes flat. The judge will think I’m hiding something.” Nobody had mentioned ground rules to him.
When the court must hold a ground rules hearing
Rule 3A.5 of the Family Procedure Rules makes the court look at whether a party’s vulnerability is likely to diminish the quality of their evidence. If so, it must consider whether any participation directions are necessary, taking the person’s views into account.
One measure is questioning in court with an intermediary’s help (rule 3A.8). The intermediary passes on questions and answers, explaining them where needed (rule 3A.1).
Once the court decides a vulnerable party will give evidence, Practice Direction 3AA requires a ground rules hearing first. The court must then consider how questioning will run, for example topics agreed in advance or one advocate asking every question.
Telling the court early
We advised him to raise his autism straight away. Under the Practice Direction, the court and every party must identify any vulnerable party or witness at the earliest possible stage.
We helped him write his form C2 application for participation directions, which he filed himself. Following paragraph 6.1, it said why he would benefit from help, which measures he wanted, and how each would improve his participation and the quality of his evidence.
He attached his diagnosis letter and asked for an intermediary assessment. HMCTS guidance lets a party without a lawyer ask the court for intermediary support; if approved, the court arranges the assessment. HMCTS funds most approved intermediary services.
The intermediary spent a morning with him. The report recommended one short question at a time and no tag questions, such as “You were angry, weren’t you?” It also asked for plain words, a break every forty minutes and a picture timetable. He asked the court to make them the ground rules.
What he asked for at the ground rules hearing
We went through each recommendation so he could explain it himself. The ban on tag questions mattered most. Under pressure he agrees with anything, so a question ending “didn’t you?” could draw an admission he never meant. Timed breaks mattered because he would never ask for one mid-question.
We also suggested he ask for the other side’s questioning topics in advance. He asked, too, for the judge to read the intermediary’s report, so nobody would mistake his flat voice for evasion. The judge made directions on each point, with reasons on the order as rule 3A.9 requires.
He hoped the judge would stop questions about the car keys. We explained that ground rules set the manner of questioning, and the mother’s lawyer could still test his account. We helped him practise answering that topic plainly, and saying “I don’t understand” when he did not.
Giving evidence under the ground rules
The intermediary sat beside him with the timetable. When the mother’s lawyer asked a two-part question, the intermediary flagged it and the lawyer split it. Breaks came on time, as the ground rules said. Twice he said he did not understand, and the lawyer asked again in plainer words.
The judge found one allegation proved: he had taken her car keys, as he admitted. She did not find the bank account or workplace allegations proved. She said she had read the intermediary’s report and drew nothing from his lack of eye contact.
Cafcass then prepared a welfare report, and the court restored alternate weekends, building from days to overnights over three months. His sister does the handovers. The outcome rested on his facts, and yours may differ.
If you are autistic and facing cross-examination
This week, find your hearing date and any statement deadline in your last order. Check whether it already contains participation directions. Gather your diagnosis report or a letter confirming it. Keep your notes and messages unchanged.
Then apply on form C2 for participation directions and an intermediary assessment. If no ground rules hearing is listed before the fact-finding hearing, ask for one. If your court lacks a measure, rule 3A.8 lets it sit at the nearest or most convenient court that has it.
Our guides to an intermediary in family court, special measures and cross-examination in fact-finding hearings go further.
“Before the intermediary assessment, write down what a bad day looks like for you, with two or three real examples. Hand it over at the start. One meeting cannot show everything, and the recommendations rest on what the intermediary learns.
Ask for the participation directions to cover every later hearing where you may speak. The court’s duty to consider them lasts until the case ends, so raise any new difficulty at once.”
Hannah Overton, Complex Children Specialist & Client Support, Kabir Family Law
Worried about how you will cope with questions?
Our family law specialists offer a free first consultation, in confidence. We can go through what to ask for before your ground rules hearing. Read our approach to these success stories.
The legal issue
An autistic father in his thirties had his six-year-old son every other weekend, overnight, until the mother stopped the visits. He then applied for a child arrangements order. In her reply on form C1A, the mother alleged that he had taken her car keys during an argument so that she could not drive away, checked her bank account every week and arrived at her workplace without warning. He accepted taking the keys and disputed everything else. The court set a fact-finding hearing, at which the mother's lawyer would cross-examine him. He feared he would lose track of two-part questions and agree to suggestions just to end the pressure. He also feared that his flat voice and lack of eye contact would be taken for evasion.
The law this rests on
- Family Procedure Rules 2010 r.3A.1: a participation direction is a general case management direction for the purpose of assisting a witness or party, or a direction that a witness or party should have the assistance of one or more of the measures in r.3A.8. An intermediary is a person whose function is to communicate questions to a witness or party, communicate the answers to the person asking, and explain the questions or answers so far as necessary for them to be understood.
- FPR r.3A.3(1) and r.3A.7: when considering vulnerability, the court must have regard in particular to the matters in r.3A.7(a) to (j) and (m), which include any characteristic of the party or witness relevant to the participation direction that may be made.
- FPR r.3A.5: the court must consider whether the quality of evidence given by a party or witness is likely to be diminished by reason of vulnerability and, if so, whether it is necessary to make one or more participation directions. Before making them, it must consider any views the person has expressed about giving evidence.
- FPR r.3A.8(1)(e): a measure may provide for a party or witness to be questioned in court with the assistance of an intermediary. r.3A.8(2): if the family court directs a measure that is not available where it is sitting, it may direct that it will sit at the nearest or most convenient location where the measure is available.
- FPR r.3A.9: the court's duties under rr.3A.3 to 3A.6 apply as soon as possible after proceedings start and continue until they are resolved. In proceedings involving a vulnerable person, the court must set out on the order its reasons for making, varying or revoking directions under Part 3A, or for deciding not to.
- FPR r.3A.10(1) and (2): an application for directions may be made on the application form that starts the proceedings, or during the proceedings by filing an application notice; either must contain the matters set out in Practice Direction 3AA. GOV.UK form C2 is used to request an order or directions in existing proceedings relating to children.
- Practice Direction 3AA para 1.3: the court and all parties have a duty to identify any party or witness who is a vulnerable person at the earliest possible stage of any family proceedings.
- PD3AA para 5.2: when the court has decided that a vulnerable party should give evidence, there shall be a ground rules hearing before any hearing at which evidence is to be heard, at which any necessary participation directions will be given. It does not need to be a separate hearing.
- PD3AA para 5.5: where a vulnerable party is to be cross-examined, the court must consider participation directions prescribing the manner of cross-examination, including whether questions asked by one advocate should not be repeated by another without the court's permission, whether questions or topics should be agreed before the hearing, whether the questions should be put by one advocate alone or, if appropriate, by the judge, and whether the evidence should be managed in any other way.
- PD3AA para 6.1: an application should explain why the person would benefit from assistance, the measures likely to maximise the quality of their evidence, and why those measures would improve their ability to participate and the quality of their evidence.
- HMCTS intermediary services guidance (GOV.UK): a person without a lawyer can ask the court or tribunal where the hearing will take place for intermediary support, by email, post or in person at a hearing; if approved, the court arranges an assessment. HMCTS's GOV.UK page on requesting an approved intermediary assessment states that the services of approved intermediaries are mostly funded by HMCTS, except pre-hearing conferences in the family court. FPR r.3A.8(4): nothing in the rules gives the court power to direct that public funding must be available to provide a measure.
- Children Act 1989 s.8(1): a child arrangements order regulates with whom, and when, a child is to live, spend time or otherwise have contact. s.7(1): when considering a question about a child under the Act, the court may ask Cafcass (an officer of the Service) to report to it on the child's welfare.
- Form C1A (GOV.UK): supplemental information when making or responding to allegations of harm and domestic violence.
How we approached it
Our first advice was to tell the court about his autism at once, because Practice Direction 3AA makes it the duty of the court and all parties to identify a vulnerable party or witness as soon as possible in the proceedings. We helped him prepare a form C2 application for participation directions that covered the points in paragraph 6.1, with his diagnosis letter attached, and to ask for an intermediary assessment.
We went through the intermediary's recommendations with him so he could explain each one himself: single short questions, no tag questions, plain words, breaks at forty-minute intervals and a visual timetable. We advised him to ask for the other side's topics in advance and to invite the judge to read the intermediary's report before the hearing.
We told him plainly that the ground rules would shape the manner of questioning and that his account would still be tested. We then helped him practise answering the hardest topic in short sentences and saying when he did not understand.
The outcome
At the ground rules hearing the judge made a direction on every point he raised and recorded her reasons on the order. At the fact-finding hearing an intermediary sat beside him, a two-part question was split after the intermediary raised it, and every break came when the timetable said. The judge accepted his own account of taking the car keys and found that allegation proved. She found neither the bank account nor the workplace allegation proved, noting that the intermediary's report had been read and that nothing was drawn from his lack of eye contact. After a Cafcass welfare report, alternate weekends resumed, starting with daytime visits and building to overnight stays over three months, with his sister handling handovers. Another family, with different evidence, could see a different result.
What to take from this
- Tell the court about autism, or any condition that affects how you give evidence, as early as you can. Practice Direction 3AA puts that duty on the court and on every party.
- Apply on form C2 for participation directions. Say why you would benefit from help, which measures you need, and how they would improve your participation and the quality of your evidence.
- Ask the court for an intermediary assessment, so the judge has specific recommendations in front of them. If you have no lawyer, ask the court that will hear your case, by email, post or in person at a hearing; if it approves, it arranges the assessment. HMCTS says it funds most approved intermediary services, so cost need not stop you asking.
- If the court has decided you will give evidence and no ground rules hearing is listed, ask for one before the fact-finding hearing.
- The ground rules change how you are questioned. Your account will still be tested, so prepare for the hardest topics.
- Read the order after the ground rules hearing and check that it gives reasons.
- Keep your notes, messages and diagnosis papers unaltered, and bring the timetable on the day.
Checked and approved for publication by Iblal Iqbal.
Last reviewed .
