By 
Success story
A father acting in person expected to question the mother at a fact-finding hearing. Beforehand, the judge said he could not, and that the court might appoint a qualified legal representative instead. We helped him get ready for that hearing.
Told he could not ask the questions
He had a child arrangements order for alternate weekends with his two children, and had applied to add holiday overnight stays. In reply, the mother raised allegations for the first time on a C1A form: that he threw a mug at her during an argument, sent threatening messages and blocked her car in at a handover. He accepted throwing a mug into the sink in anger, but not at her, and denied the rest.
A fact-finding hearing was listed, and the court granted the mother’s request on form EX740 for a ban on cross-examination in person. “It feels as if I’ve already been found guilty,” he told us.
When the court appoints a qualified legal representative
Part 4B of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, added by section 65 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 from 21 July 2022, sets the rules. Some bans are automatic, such as after a conviction, caution or charge for a specified offence against the witness. Our guide to cross-examination in fact-finding hearings sets them out; none applied here.
The judge used section 31U. It allows a ban where questioning in person would likely harm the quality of the witness’s evidence, or cause the witness or the questioning parent significant distress, more than other questioning would. The ban must not be contrary to the interests of justice, and the judge must give reasons. It governs only how questions are asked, and finds nothing about the allegations.
Under section 31W, the court first asks whether there is a satisfactory alternative. Practice Direction 3AB says the judge asking the questions does not count. If not, the court invites the parent to arrange their own qualified legal representative and report back by a set date. Failing that, it must appoint one of its own choosing if the interests of justice require it.
That lawyer questions the witness in the parent’s interests but is not responsible to them. Their fees come from central funds, under regulations made under section 31X.
How we helped him prepare for the QLR
His statement and evidence stayed his own. He could not afford a lawyer for the questioning, so we advised him to tell the court before the deadline. The court then appointed a QLR from its list, with access to the bundle.
We explained the limits in the Lord Chancellor’s statutory guidance. The QLR is not his lawyer. They cannot advise him, help with documents or promise the confidentiality of his own lawyer. Nor are they expected to make his closing submissions.
From sixty questions to one page
He had written sixty questions, many about her new partner and old arguments. The guidance lets the QLR consider his suggestions, but they decide what to ask. They put the essence of his case on points that could change the outcome. So we advised a one-page note of topics.
The note took each allegation in turn: what he accepted, what he denied and supporting bundle pages. We advised him to download the full message history with dates, so both sides showed. His phone stayed untouched.
His statement, we advised, should say exactly what he accepted, so the QLR need not challenge it.
We prepared him to stay quiet during her evidence, pass new points on a note at the break, and answer her lawyer briefly and honestly.
What the judge decided
The QLR met him beforehand and read his note. At the hearing, the QLR put the essence of his case to the mother; he then gave his own evidence.
The judge found the mug incident proved as he had admitted it: he threw it into the sink in anger. Read as whole threads, the messages showed angry words on both sides, and the judge found no threats. The judge could not find the car incident more likely than not, but made no finding that anyone lied.
After Cafcass’s welfare report, the court added holiday overnight stays, building up over a year, with handovers at a family friend’s home. Results turn on their own facts; this is no promise about yours.
A QLR checklist if you cannot ask the questions
If you are a litigant in person facing the ban, read each order for who the QLR will question, when they get the bundle and every deadline, including the date to tell the court about your own lawyer. The QLR questions only the witnesses the order names, so you may have to question others yourself.
Give the QLR one page of topics with page references. Keep original messages, your phone and devices unaltered. Ask early if either of you needs special measures, for example a screen. Never discuss the evidence with the other parent or on social media. Prepare your own closing points.
“The court appoints a qualified legal representative for one task: testing the evidence on the points that matter. They choose the questions and the wording, so explain the point you need tested. A ban normally lasts until the end of the case, so read each new order to see whether the QLR will attend. Keep to facts in what you tell them, because they cannot promise the confidentiality you would have with your own lawyer.”
Hannah Overton, Complex Children Specialist, Kabir Family Law
Talk it through with us
If you cannot question the other parent yourself, you need not prepare alone. A free initial consultation is confidential. We will explain what a qualified legal representative can and cannot do, and help you plan your note. Read how we prepare these success stories.
The legal issue
A father acting in person had a child arrangements order giving him alternate weekends with his two children, and applied to add overnight stays in the school holidays. In reply, the mother raised allegations for the first time on a C1A form: that he had thrown a mug at her during an argument, sent her threatening messages and blocked her car in at a handover. He accepted throwing a mug into the sink in anger once, but denied throwing it at her and denied the rest. A fact-finding hearing was listed and, at the mother's request on form EX740, the court directed that he must not question her in person. He felt he had been treated as guilty before any evidence was heard.
The law this rests on
- Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 Part 4B (ss.31Q to 31Z): prohibition of cross-examination in person in family proceedings, inserted by Domestic Abuse Act 2021 s.65 and in force from 21 July 2022 (SI 2022/840). It extends to England and Wales.
- MFPA 1984 s.31Q: in Part 4B, a witness includes a party to the proceedings.
- MFPA 1984 ss.31R, 31S and 31T: automatic prohibitions where a party has been convicted of, given a caution for or charged with a specified offence and the witness is the victim or alleged victim; where an on-notice protective injunction is in force; or where there is specified evidence of domestic abuse.
- MFPA 1984 s.31U(1) to (4): where no automatic prohibition applies, the court may direct that a party must not cross-examine a witness in person if the quality condition or the significant distress condition is met and the direction would not be contrary to the interests of justice. It may do so on a party's application or of its own motion.
- MFPA 1984 s.31U(5): the court has regard to, among other things, the views of the witness and the party, the nature of the questions likely to be asked, any findings of fact, the behaviour of each generally and towards the other, and any relationship between them.
- MFPA 1984 s.31V(1) to (4) and PD3AB para 4.1: a direction binds until the witness is discharged, which, unless the court orders otherwise, is at the end of the proceedings rather than the end of their evidence. The court may revoke it earlier if that is in the interests of justice, but on a party's application only if there has been a material change of circumstances. The court must state its reasons.
- MFPA 1984 s.31W(2) and (3): the court must consider whether there is a satisfactory alternative means. If there is not, it must invite the party to arrange a qualified legal representative and to tell the court, by a time it specifies, whether one will act.
- MFPA 1984 s.31W(4) to (7): if none will act, the court must consider whether it is necessary in the interests of justice for the witness to be cross-examined by a qualified legal representative appointed by the court. If so, it must appoint one of its own choosing to cross-examine the witness in the interests of the party, and that person is not responsible to the party.
- MFPA 1984 s.31W(8): a qualified legal representative is a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to the exercise of a right of audience in family proceedings.
- MFPA 1984 s.31X and the Prohibition of Cross-Examination in Person (Fees of Court-Appointed Qualified Legal Representatives) Regulations 2022 (SI 2022/567): the fees of a court-appointed qualified legal representative are paid out of central funds.
- MFPA 1984 s.31Y and the Lord Chancellor's statutory guidance on the role (GOV.UK, in force from 31 May 2024): the QLR is not the party's lawyer, cannot give advice, help with documents or promise legal professional privilege, may take the party's suggested questions into consideration, puts the essence of the party's case on the parts of the evidence that may have a significant impact on the outcome, and is not expected to make submissions. The QLR is expected in most cases to meet the party, should at no stage take the party's instructions, and questions only the witnesses named in the order.
- FPR r.3A.13 and Practice Direction 3AB: para 3.6 (the order gives reasons for a direction), para 3.7 (a direction may be made for reasons other than domestic abuse), para 5.3 (the court itself asking the questions is not a satisfactory alternative), paras 6.1 and 6.2 (the party is invited to arrange a qualified legal representative and to notify the court by a set date; otherwise the court considers appointing one from the list it keeps), para 7.1 (the order names the witnesses and gives access to the bundle), para 7.2 (the order may say which hearings the QLR must attend), para 6.4 (appointing a QLR does not stop the court directing special measures under r.3A.8).
- FPR Practice Direction 12J para 28: the court should consider whether r.3A.13 and PD3AB, on the prohibition of cross-examination in person, are of relevance. Para 28A: each party can be asked to identify the questions they wish to ask, and the judge should be prepared where necessary and appropriate to conduct the questioning; under PD3AB para 5.3, the court itself conducting the cross-examination is not a satisfactory alternative means under s.31W(2).
- FPR r.3A.8(1)(a): special measures can prevent a party or witness from seeing another party or witness.
- Forms EX740 (for the person who has accused someone of abuse) and EX741 (for the person accused), GOV.UK: information for the court and an application to it to prevent questioning in person.
- Form C1A (GOV.UK): supplemental information when making or responding to allegations of harm and domestic violence.
- Children Act 1989 s.7: the court may ask for a welfare report. s.1(1): the child's welfare is the court's paramount consideration.
How we approached it
We explained that a direction under section 31U of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 deals only with how questions are asked and makes no finding about the allegations; Practice Direction 3AB says such a direction may be made for reasons other than domestic abuse. He would still write his own witness statement and give his own evidence, and the closing points to the judge would be his.
He could not afford to pay a lawyer for the questioning, so we advised him to tell the court before the date it had set rather than let it pass. The court appointed a qualified legal representative from its list. We explained the limits of the role under the Lord Chancellor's statutory guidance: the QLR is not his lawyer, cannot advise him or help with documents, is not expected to make his closing submissions, and cannot promise the confidentiality he would have with his own lawyer.
We helped him turn sixty questions into a one-page note of topics that took each allegation in turn, setting out what he accepted and what he denied, with the bundle pages that supported him. We advised him to download the full message history with dates, to keep his phone and change nothing on it, and to say plainly in his statement that he had thrown the mug into the sink, never at her. We prepared him to stay quiet while the QLR questioned the mother, to pass any new point on a note at a break, and to answer the mother's lawyer briefly and honestly.
The outcome
The qualified legal representative met the father before the hearing and read his note. At the hearing, the mother gave evidence first and the QLR put the essence of his case to her; he then gave his own evidence. The judge found the mug incident proved in the form he had admitted: he threw it into the sink in anger during an argument. Read as whole threads, the messages showed angry words on both sides, and the judge did not find them threatening. The allegation that he blocked her car in at a handover was not proved; the judge explained that the evidence did not show it was more likely than not, and made no finding that anyone had lied. After Cafcass's welfare report, the court added overnight stays in the school holidays, building up over a year, with handovers at a family friend's home. The result rested on this evidence and promises nothing about any other case.
What to take from this
- A ban on questioning in person under Part 4B of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 decides how questions are asked. A direction under section 31U makes no finding about the allegations, and Practice Direction 3AB says one may be made for reasons other than domestic abuse.
- A direction normally lasts until the end of the proceedings, not just the end of the witness's evidence. The court can revoke it earlier if the interests of justice require, but on a party's application only after a material change of circumstances.
- If the court invites you to arrange your own qualified legal representative, tell it by the date it sets, even if the answer is that you cannot. A court-appointed QLR is paid from central funds.
- The QLR is not your lawyer. Under the statutory guidance they cannot advise you or help with documents, they are not expected to make your closing submissions, and they cannot promise the confidentiality you would have with your own lawyer.
- Give the QLR a one-page note of topics: what you accept and what you deny on each allegation, with page references. The QLR decides the questions.
- Say plainly what you accept. It keeps the questioning on what is really in dispute.
- Check each order for who the QLR will question and every deadline. The QLR questions only the witnesses the order names; you may have to question any others yourself. Keep original messages, your phone and other devices unaltered, ask early for any special measures, and never discuss the evidence with the other parent or on social media.
Checked and approved for publication by Iblal Iqbal.
Last reviewed .
