I had a directions hearing recently in enforcement proceedings where the judge said that because the parties could not reach agreement (on whether the order had been broken), the judge could not make an interim order? The judge would not even give us their interpretation of the relevant paragraphs of the order!
Is it correct that judges do not have any power to make interim orders in the absence of agreement and in advance of making a finding regarding whether there has been a breach, or is it simply that this judge didn't want to make an order in these circumstances? Seems nonsensical to me, surely they have a range of powers available under the Children Act 1989 if they decide something is in the welfare of the child?
I ask in particular because we have an FHDRA coming up, are we likely to have the same lack of action all the way through to final hearing if there is no agreement?