Introduction
Towards the end of last year, you may have noticed a revised version of Practice Direction 27A now features on the Government’s Justice website. These amendments to the Practice Direction come into force on 2nd March 2026 so it is worth taking the time to read the contents in full and familiarising yourself with the changes.
The recent revision of PD27A marks a significant recalibration of how evidence is prepared, presented and controlled in family proceedings. While PD27A has long been familiar territory for family practitioners, its updated form is more than a technical tidy-up. It reflects a clear judicial intention to enforce proportionality more robustly, reduce unnecessary material before the court, and sharpen the issues for each hearing.
One interesting and helpful distinction in the new Practice Direction is how some directions are separated into Financial Remedy, Public and Private Law proceedings, and directions that apply to all proceedings.
Much of PD27A will already be known to practitioners, but below I highlight some of the changes and provisions of particular relevance to Private Law cases.
Non-compliance
The Practice Direction starts strong by reminding parties of the consequences of non-compliance:
3.1 Failure to comply with any part of this practice direction may result in the court removing the case from the list or putting the case further back in the list and may also result in an adverse costs order or a ‘wasted costs’ order.
Bundles
One key direction is the prohibition on what can be included in bundles as standard and this direction applies to all proceedings (subject to 5.1). It is notable that correspondence, screenshots of communication, and photographs must not be included in bundles unless directed or unless the court will be referred to those documents in the hearing:
5.2 The bundle must contain copies of only those documents which are relevant to the hearing and which it is necessary for the court to read or which will actually be referred to during the hearing. In particular, copies of the following classes of documents must not be included in the bundle unless the court directs otherwise:
(a) correspondence (including letters of instruction to experts and correspondence between legal representatives);
(b) copies of emails, text messages, WhatsApp messages or any form of social media communications;
(c) voice notes or other recordings;
(d) bank and credit card statements and other financial records;
(e) notes of contact visits;
(f) foster carer logs;
(g) social services files (with the exception of any assessment being relied on by any of the parties);
(h) photographs.
This does not prevent the inclusion in the bundle of specific documents which it is necessary for the court to read or which will actually be referred to during the hearing.
Bundles shall now be e-bundles as standard, save for when there is to be live evidence, in which case a hard-copy bundle will need to be provided. Chapter 7 of the Practice Direction refers to the structure and content of bundles for all proceedings other than Financial Remedy Proceedings. Bundles should be formulated as outlined below, paying particular attention to numbering – bundles should follow Bates numbering system for each section, eg A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3 etc.
7.2 In a bundle for a hearing in proceedings other than for a financial remedy:
(a) the documents in each section of the bundle must be arranged in chronological order from the front of the section,
(b) the bundle must include an index at the beginning, which should not be paginated;
(c) the bundle must be divided into the separate sections specified in paragraph 7.3. If blank pages are used to divide sections, each of those pages must be numbered (using the numbering system referred to below);
(d) the documents must be paginated individually, using the Bates numbering system (see paragraph 1.2).
Preliminary documents
Preliminary documents in Public Law proceedings are covered in 7.4 to 7.7. From 7.8 the chapters consider preliminary documents in proceedings other than public law proceedings. Pay particular care to what needs to be included in preliminary documents per 7.10.
7.8 Paragraphs 7.9 to 7.10 apply in relation to all proceedings to which this Chapter applies, other than public law proceedings.
7.9 The preliminary documents must usually be prepared by the applicant. However, in the event that the applicant is a litigant in person, the preliminary documents referred to at paragraph 7.10(a), (b) and (f) must be prepared by a represented party.
7.10 In proceedings to which this Chapter applies, other than public law proceedings, the preliminary documents referred to at paragraph 7.3(a) are:
(a) an agreed up-to-date case summary of the background to the hearing confined to those matters which are relevant to the hearing and the management of the case and limited, if practicable, to six pages (see paragraph 8.1);
(b) an agreed statement of the issue or issues to be determined (i) at that hearing and (ii) at the final hearing;
(c) any form FM5 which has been filed in the proceedings (see rule 3.3(1A) FPR);
(d) a position statement by each party including a summary of the order or directions sought by that party (i) at that hearing and (ii) at the final hearing (see paragraphs 7.17 to 7.20);
(e) a skeleton argument (see paragraph 7.17);
(f) an agreed up-to-date chronology, if it is a final hearing or if the summary under (a) is insufficient, each entry being limited, if practicable, to one sentence and cross-referenced to the relevant page(s) in the bundle;
(g) an agreed list of essential reading for that hearing; and
(h) where a hearing is an evidential hearing, a contested hearing or a final hearing, an agreed witness template (also known as a hearing template, a timetable for the hearing or a time estimate) which must-
(i) allow a reasonable and realistic time for judicial reading and judgment writing;
(ii) not normally allow longer than 30 minutes for opening;
(iii) detail the time needed for any questioning of witnesses; and
(iv) not normally allow for any evidence-in-chief (pursuant to rule 22.6(2) FPR, the parties’ witness statements will normally stand as their evidence-in-chief).
The revised Practice Directions answers an age-old question amongst practitioners: “what is a position statement?”:
7.17 In relation to proceedings other than for a financial remedy, “position statement” is the term for any form of written submission by a party, or their advocate, which sets out a party’s position on the issues to be determined at the particular hearing. In this context, a skeleton argument is not part of a position statement. A skeleton argument is a separate document (see paragraphs 7.6(d) and 7.10(e)) which sets out a party’s arguments in support of their position on the issues to be determined at the particular hearing.
7.18 In proceedings other than for a financial remedy, position statements should:
(a) be concise and not exceed 3 pages, unless the court accepts the case is complex and directs a different maximum number of pages;
(b) both define and confine the matters in dispute to be resolved at the hearing;
(c) be set out in numbered paragraphs;
(d) be cross-referenced to any relevant documents in the bundle;
(e) be self-contained and not incorporate by reference material from previous position statements;
(f) not include extensive quotations from documents;
(g) not introduce any new evidence;
(h) not include any exhibits;
(i) set out the directions or orders sought;
(g) where applicable, include information to inform the court of-
(i) the parties’ compliance with the duty to negotiate openly and reasonably; and
(ii) the parties’ views on using non-court dispute resolution as a means of resolving the matters in dispute; and
(h) be prepared in accordance with the applicable requirements in this Practice Direction: see in particular Chapters 11 and 12.
7.19 Where it is necessary to refer to an authority (see Chapter 10), a position statement must first state the proposition of law the authority demonstrates; and then identify the parts of the authority that support the proposition, but without extensive quotation from it.
7.20 A position statement must be prepared for each hearing. It is not appropriate to use a position statement from one hearing, with an added “update” section, for a subsequent hearing.
Timescales for filing
By this point, we know that an agreed bundle needs to be lodged, along with agreed preliminary documents, and position statements. When do these documents need to be filed? Note the tight and changed timescales below.
13.1 The timescales provided for in this Chapter are subject to any case-specific directions of the court.
13.2 The following timescales apply each time a bundle is to be filed for a given hearing.
| Time period: no later than the stated number of days, or the stated time, before a given hearing | Action to be taken |
| Seven working days | Parties must seek to agree the contents of the bundle. |
| Five working days | The bundle, with the exception of the preliminary documents if and insofar as they are not available, must be (a) served and (b) filed by the person responsible for preparing the bundle on the other parties. |
| 11am on the working day before the hearing | The preliminary documents, if not already served and filed, must be served on all parties and filed with the court by the person responsible for preparing the bundle. Where the hearing is before a judge of the High Court and the name of the judge is known, the preliminary documents must also be sent by email to the judge’s clerk. |
13.3 Once the bundle has been filed with the court ahead of a given hearing, the bundle must not be amended before that hearing has taken place without the prior agreement of the court, which may be given, for example, if there is an accepted error in the bundle or if additional documents are required in the form of a supplemental bundle.
Taking cases of out the list
And what if, after all that preparation, the hearing will no longer be effective? There are clear directions, which have an emphasis on agreement, to take a case out of the list. Note, in particular, the need for a written application, draft order, and enough information to allow the court to make a decision on the papers:
19.1 As soon as it becomes known that a hearing will no longer be effective, whether as a result of the parties reaching agreement or for any other reason, the parties and their representatives must immediately apply to the court-
(a) where applicable, via the relevant HMCTS online system (Portal);
(b) where sub-paragraph (a) does not apply-
(i) by email, which must be confirmed by an application filed with the court in hard copy as soon as practicable; or
(ii) by filing a hard copy application, where a party cannot communicate with the court by email.
19.2 The application referred to at paragraph 19.1-
(a) must, wherever possible, be a consent application, sent on behalf of all parties with their signatures applied or appended; and
(b) must include-
(i) a short background summary of the case;
(ii) the written consent of each party who consents and, where a party does not consent, details of the steps which have been taken to obtain that party’s consent and, where known, an explanation of why that consent has not been given;
(iii) a draft of the order being sought; and
(iv) enough information to enable the court to decide-
(aa) whether to take the case out of the list; and
(bb) whether to make the proposed order.
Conclusion
It seems to me that one of the anticipated benefits of the revised PD27A is its potential to reduce the temperature of proceedings where possible. The emphasis on agreed preliminary documents, the advance preparation of bundles, and having length-limited position statements a day ahead of the hearing (and prohibitions on what those position statements can include) should lessen the sense of ambush or urgency that clients may experience in Private Law in the lead up to a hearing.
