Would the FDR judge be the same as the one on the first appointment?

[JKM66]

Please help. I am just very worried. Our case is very simple but the ex-to-be is making it very complicated. I want to know form people that have had such experience if they had the same judge for both first appointment and the FDR? It would be easier as the judge on the first appointment already asked questions and may know the case better.
Thank you for your help.

[Elektra1]

No, it will not be the same judge. The FDR is a without prejudice hearing and so the judge for it has to be different to the judge from the directions hearing and the judge at the final hearing.

[Elektra1]

Also don't expect the judge at the FDR to know the case at all. Judges are massively over burdened and have very little time to pre-read. They rely a lot on the advocacy of the barristers to take them through the issues. On the day of the FDR you will be one of several couples all listed before the same judge on the same day - you all take turns going before that judge for relatively brief periods of time before being sent away to negotiate further based on indications the judge gives as to what they would order on this issue or that issue if it were a final hearing.

[JKM66]

Elektra1 Thank you so much for the info and the time. I really appreciate it.

[Mumof3confused]

First hearing and FDR can be the same but not final hearing.

It doesn’t matter though. By the time you get to FDR the judge won’t remember your case.

[JKM66]

Mumof3confused thank you so much for your info.

[momentumneeded]

I was told it might be same judge for first and final and that's exactly what happened. Thank goodness as they were a very experienced judge and got to grips with my ex's games in no time. It was a joy to watch. We were LIPs so they are careful to ensure an experienced judge. In contrast FDR judge was v inexperienced and missed so much. I was v lucky in hindsight that my ex was so stubborn and refused to back down from his ridiculous position and work with that judge's recommended outcome because I would have been financially screwed. It did give me a lot of insight into what to argue in the final hearing, knowing the FDR couldn't be referenced, and despite being a LIP I went in armed up on info with a solid position statement. Judge liked that a lot and the fact I wasn't being greedy, just putting kids first and ensuring financial security. I came out of it well but It's a brutal process and it's staggering to witness how differently two judges can perceive things. I've still not fully recovered. Good luck.

[ragdoll12345]

In an ideal world they like the same Judge to deal with all the hearings prior to the Final Heating, but if it goes to a Final Hearing (most cases settle before that stage) you will have a different Judge. However sometimes due to heavy lists etc you may have different Judges hearing the case - but if you do have a Final Hearing the Judge will not have heard your case before.

[momentumneeded]

@ragdoll12345

In an ideal world they like the same Judge to deal with all the hearings prior to the Final Heating, but if it goes to a Final Hearing (most cases settle before that stage) you will have a different Judge. However sometimes due to heavy lists etc you may have different Judges hearing the case - but if you do have a Final Hearing the Judge will not have heard your case before.

This was not my personal experience (English jurisdiction). I had the same judge for first and final hearing. Where I am located this is apparently often the case for financial remedy proceedings, as born out by friends who have also gone through final hearings. Maybe it differs around the country.

[JKM66]

momentumneeded Thank you so much. It sounds hit and miss with the judges. I am dreading it. I have offered a very simple solution and works for both but he will not agree on anything. It's about creating pain and dragging this process as long as possible despite that we both do not have money. I applied for a loan to pay the solicitor, he had some savings.
He perceives himself as poor me, I will be retired and will not have enough income and i am suffering for cancer (was cleared 8 yrs ago) but in fact he will have state pension, professional pension, a small pension back home and free home to live on in our country after he retires. Only himself to care for.
I pray to God that the judge can see it through.
Thanks again.
(Sorry what is LIP)

[JKM66]

ragdoll12345 Thank you for your input.

[momentumneeded]

@JKM66

LIP is a litigant in person - you represent yourself in court (but can take legal advice in the background). I just couldn't justify the further costs of a barrister for a 2 day final hearing. It would have been c. £4K for that alone and at the end of the day if you are v organised and can stay calm, no one knows your case as well as you do. I'm really glad I did it but can't lie, it was stressful.

You could also look at using a Mackenzie Friend (Google to find one local to you) - a good half way house.

Noted your comment on pensions - you should be arguing for equality of income in retirement. This is the baseline and one thing that both the FDR and judge at final hearing agreed on! It might mean you receive pension sharing orders from your ex's pension pot to balance things out. Did you have to get an actuary report? We were instructed to do so at first hearing. It was worth it but cost c. £1k each. Equity and assets were treated separately. Pension offsetting seems less popular with judges now.

Re. paying legal costs if you have joint savings you could take out 50% - that would be fair and reasonable in the circumstances.

Don't let him bully you - they drag things out to get you to give up. Stick to the court schedule and it will end eventually! Trust in the process.

[momentumneeded]

@JKM66
I meant to add that you should ensure the house he has overseas & the pensions are factored in to Form E and later on the asset schedule. Even if money cannot be raised from the property, there will be a financial value attached which might benefit you when you split assets.

[JKM66]

momentumneeded  Thank you again. Both our pensions are the same value from what i can see from the annual statement but he has asked for pension sharing as he wants to drag the process as long as possible. I actually am very agitated by it as i have applied for the CEV in December and i still haven't got it. He submitted form P1 last week with will take months to come, which will risk postponing the FDR. I am 100% sure that we will not be asked for the actuary as it is not worth it. It should have been dismissed at the first appointment as it is clear that both pensions are the same.
Thanks.

[JKM66]

momentumneeded he didn’t declare the oversees pension. I have raised it on the questionnaire.

[momentumneeded]

@JKM66

momentumneeded he didn’t declare the oversees pension. I have raised it on the questionnaire.

Ah well done. Good to get them and the property on the asset schedule. That is key as later you state whether you agree/ disagree with each item and discrepancies are reviewed by the judge. The questionnaire is really important in terms of showing up if someone is lying or hiding assets - you can ask them to evidence pretty much anything if it is relevant, eg wills, financials from any time before or during marriage etc., any withdrawals or deposits from accounts, uk and oversees. No time limit. Use it wisely because they will scrutinise it in detail at the final hearing. Any replies can be challenged further. Equally, make sure your replies are solid, be transparent but do not overshare info as you can be cross examined on them at FDR and final hearing.