Chair’s Column (Spring 2026)

In this issue we say farewell to Sir James Munby, who unexpectedly died on New Year’s Day, aged 77. May I commend the obituary by Sir Nicholas Mostyn, which combines a serious and detailed analysis of a most distinguished legal career with some compelling personal reminiscences of a good friend.

Like many who have written about James since his death, I have only positive memories of the many times our paths crossed, usually in the context of some initiative or another in the financial remedies world. At the top of the list, for me, is the pivotal role he played in the creation of the Financial Remedies Court. James himself wrote a definitive history of this event in the Financial Remedies Journal – ‘The Origins of the Financial Remedies Court: an Insider’s View’ (in fact so comprehensive was it that we broke it into two parts in the Spring and Summer 2022 editions) – in which he explained how the Financial Remedies Court came to be created. He was generous enough in this exposition to acknowledge the original source of the idea. In mid-2016, Joanna Miles (a Cambridge academic) and I attended a meeting in Birmingham to discuss with local practitioners and judges the Family Justice Council paper on Needs then in preparation. Travelling down in the lift afterwards we mutually came up with the idea of writing a paper on the creation of a new specialist financial remedies court. The paper was duly written and sent to the then President with a covering email, which diffidently hinted ‘No doubt you will (politely) tell us if you think the idea a non-starter’. Within 48 hours, James not only replied, but also told us that he felt that our blueprint was without doubt the way forward and he moved quickly to publicise his approval and began to put the plan into practice. His ambitious plans surprisingly received opposition from some of his very senior colleagues and he was obliged to commit to scale back his initial plans to the creation of only one pilot court, to be based in Birmingham, a commitment from which he gloriously (and perhaps a little mischievously) released himself in the very last hour of the very last day of his Presidency, 27 July 2018. His last official act as President was to issue a President’s Circular which announced the extension of the Financial Remedies Court plan to an almost nationwide level to take effect in the ‘near future’, an announcement which (it later became apparent) he had not cleared with his very senior colleagues. Happily, James’ Presidential successor was soon able to steer the execution of the announcement through some ruffled senior judicial feathers and, within a short time after that, the Financial Remedies Court was duly born. It has subsequently developed into the specialist and digitised court which matched what James had envisaged, no doubt with many problems yet to be solved, but in many people’s views a beacon of a modern digital court structure. It is unlikely that this would have happened without the vision, energy, engagement and forceful personality evinced by James in glorious abundance.

I am pleased to say that James was also a great supporter of the Financial Remedies Journal. He was a regular contributor of articles and blogs right up to his death. We always sent him a paper copy of the journal and he would, with unfailing courteousness, send me an email to thank and congratulate us on the copy, and to pick out the articles in the issue which had given him particular pleasure. He retained his great interest in the world of financial remedies to the last – and continued to hold strong views on big issues (transparency) and little issues (bundle numbering) with great passion.

I would unhesitatingly identify James as the most inspirational figure I have come across in my legal and judicial career and I, like many others, will hugely miss the sad departure of this very great man.