Intermediaries are there to make sure everyone can engage in Court proceedings properly and ensure they are supported to understand the proceedings as best they can.

They are appointed more and more in public law children matters where the Local Authority are involved. They are essential in achieving compliance with Article 6 ECHR and the right to a fair hearing.

There was limited guidance on the appointment and use of intermediaries. Recently, two High Court decisions offer useful pointers for practitioners. The cases are Re X and Y (Intermediary: Practice and Procedure) [2024] EWHC 906 (Fam) and West Northamptonshire Council v KA and Others [2024] EWHC 79 (Fam).

What is the role of an intermediary?

The role of an intermediary is set out in FPR r.3A(1) as follows:

  1. To communicate questions which are put to a witness or party
  2. To communicate to any person asking questions, the answers given by the witness or party in reply; and
  3. To explain the questions or answers to enable them to be understood.

When should the Court appoint an intermediary?

Both High Court Judges in the cases above were clear that the appointment of an intermediary is a matter for the Judge.

The test, according to Mr Justice Williams, is whether the appointment of the intermediary is necessary to ensure a fair hearing (not whether there are “compelling reasons” for the appointment, as suggested by Mrs Justice Lieven).

When deciding whether to direct an intermediary assessment, the Judge should consider the factors in FPR r.3A(7). These factors include:

  1. Whether the party or witness has a mental disorder, physical disability or disorder, any other significant impairment of intelligence or social functioning, or is undergoing medical treatment;
  2. The information before the Court;
  3. The issues in the proceedings;
  4. Whether the matter is contentious;
  5. The characteristics of the party or witness – such as their maturity and understanding;
  6. The measures available to the Court; and
  7. The cost of any available measure.

The Judge should also consider how else to help, such as regular breaks, short questions in cross-examination, or the use of timelines in evidence.

The parties’ legal teams should also help with understanding. An intermediary should not be appointed just because a party or witness will struggle to understand the proceedings or because the party or witness would be assisted by an intermediary.

Therefore, the Judge should only appoint an intermediary if “necessary to enable the party to participate fairly and … the other participation directions which can be put in place short of an intermediary will not achieve that end”:

If appropriate, your legal team can make an application for an intermediary assessment considering the factors above in this blog. Here at Ringrose Law we often deal with these types of assessments and engage routinely with Intermediaries at Court hearings. This type of assessment should be considered at the start of any case if any of the issues above are relevant in the case. We can guide you through this process if necessary to ensure that all of our clients have a fair hearing.