This guide is written for solicitors, trainees and law students in England and Wales.
Rule 25.5A requires a regulated expert in children proceedings issued on or after 20 July 2026. This checklist runs a Part 25 application in order: confirm the issue date, establish regulated status by one of three routes, evidence unavailability if you need the exception, and put the right material in the application itself.
Who this checklist is for
Fee-earners preparing a Part 25 application in children proceedings, and anyone maintaining a firm’s expert list. Work through it with the application form open. It assumes familiarity with Part 25 and does not explain the permission requirement itself.
Step 1: does rule 25.5A apply to your case?
Rule 6 of the Family Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2026 carries a saving provision. The expert evidence changes do not apply to proceedings issued before 20 July 2026, and a matter already underway continues under the previous position.
The trigger is the issue date, not the hearing date and not the date of the application. Two cases at similar stages, with the same expert in mind, can fall on different sides of the line. Check the date on the application that started the proceedings before anything else, because every question below depends on the answer.
Step 2: which experts count as regulated?
Rule 25.2 defines a regulated expert. There are three routes, and you need to know which one your expert relies on:
- Regulated by a UK statutory body. The HCPC and the GMC are the common examples in children work.
- On a register accredited by the Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care. This is a voluntary membership register, not statutory regulation.
- Regulated by an approved regulator under the Legal Services Act 2007.
Get evidence rather than an assertion. Practice Direction 25B now requires the expert to confirm regulated status and provide evidence of it, both in the instructions and in the report. Asking for it at the point of the application avoids a report arriving without it.
The second route is the one that catches people out. A PSA-accredited register is broader than statutory regulation, and the two read alike on a CV. Record which basis applies.
Step 3: check whether an exemption applies
Two categories sit outside the requirement entirely, and neither needs the exception in step 4.
Technical experts, defined in rule 25.2, covering digital forensics, DNA testing, handwriting analysis and toxicology testing. International social workers, exempted by rule 25.5A(2).
If your expert falls into either category, say so in the application and identify the provision. Do not run an unavailability argument you do not need.
Step 4: what if no regulated expert is available?
Rule 25.5A(3) preserves an exception, and rule 25.5A(4) sets out the two grounds:
- the issue to which the expert evidence relates may only be resolved with the expertise of an expert who is not a regulated expert; or
- instructing a regulated expert would cause significant delay which would not be in the best interests of the child.
The exception is not self-executing. Where the court permits an unregulated expert it must give reasons, and those reasons must cover the steps the parties took to identify a regulated expert and why the expert instructed meets the standards in PD25B. PD25C requires parties to address regulated status in the application and, where relying on an exception, to explain why no regulated expert is available.
That means the searching has to happen before the application, and it has to be recorded. A statement that no regulated expert could be found, without the record of looking, gives the court nothing to give reasons from.
Why was the rule introduced?
The Family Procedure Rule Committee consulted on the change in March 2025. It recorded that parliamentarians, campaigners and the media had raised concerns in recent years about unregulated experts giving evidence in family cases, and about the standard of that evidence. Its consultation document put the problem directly: such experts, frequently using the title psychologist, were being instructed to give evidence or offer diagnoses they were not qualified to undertake.
The Committee pointed to Re C. The President of the Family Division gave judgment there on an appeal concerning the instruction of an unregulated psychologist, who had given evidence on the disputed concept of parental alienation. The Association of Clinical Psychologists UK had campaigned on the issue for several years.
Knowing the background helps with the exception. The mischief the rule targets is a person holding themselves out as qualified in a field where no regulator can be asked to confirm it. An application under rule 25.5A(4)(a) reads better where the expertise genuinely sits outside any regulated profession than where a regulated equivalent exists but is inconvenient.
What must the report and instructions contain?
PD25B has been amended to support rule 25.5A. The expert must confirm their regulated status and provide evidence of it, in the instructions and in the report itself.
Build that into the letter of instruction rather than chasing it later. A report arriving without the confirmation is incomplete against the practice direction, and the point is likely to be taken by another party before it is taken by the court.
PD25C sits alongside on the application side. Parties must address whether the expert is a regulated expert and, where an exception is relied on, explain why no regulated expert is available.
The position before and after 20 July 2026
| Question | Proceedings issued before 20 July 2026 | Proceedings issued on or after 20 July 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| Must the expert be regulated? | No procedural requirement | Yes, subject to exemptions and the exception |
| Source of the requirement | Practice and judicial expectation | Rule 25.5A FPR, with definitions in rule 25.2 |
| Evidence of status in instructions and report | Not required by PD25B | Required by PD25B |
| Content of the application | Part 25 requirements only | Must address regulated status, and explain unavailability where relied on (PD25C) |
| Court’s duty when permitting an unregulated expert | General duty to give reasons | Reasons must cover steps taken to find a regulated expert and why PD25B standards are met |
| Categories outside the requirement | Not applicable | Technical experts; international social workers |
An application naming an unregulated expert now fails on the rule rather than on the merits, and the transitional line falls on the issue date rather than the hearing date. The cost is a hearing, not a submission. Practitioners with a long-standing unregulated expert on their list need to check registration status before the application goes in, because the alternative is discovering the problem when the court asks for reasons nobody has prepared.
The application checklist
- Issue date of the proceedings confirmed and recorded on the file
- Rule 6 saving provision considered and its effect noted
- Expert’s regulated status established under rule 25.2, with the route identified
- Documentary evidence of regulated status obtained, not just asserted
- Technical expert or international social worker exemption considered and, if relied on, the provision cited
- Where no regulated expert is available: search steps recorded, with names, dates and outcomes
- Ground under rule 25.5A(4)(a) or (b) identified and evidenced
- PD25C requirements addressed in the application: regulated status, and reasons for unavailability where relied on
- Instructions drafted to require confirmation and evidence of regulated status under PD25B
- Draft order attached, with the matters required by PD25C or PD25D
- Questions the expert is required to answer stated, as rule 25.7 requires in children proceedings
Common mistakes
Checking the hearing date. The saving provision runs off the issue date. This is the single most likely error.
Treating PSA accreditation as statutory regulation. Both satisfy rule 25.2, but they are different things and the distinction will matter when a report is challenged.
Reaching for the exception first. Where a technical expert or international social worker exemption applies, the requirement does not bite at all, and running unavailability instead invites a question you do not need to answer.
Recording the conclusion but not the search. The court has to give reasons covering the steps the parties took. Those steps have to exist and be evidenced.
Assuming an existing expert list is compliant. Registration lapses. An expert who was regulated when you last instructed them may not be now.
Official sources
- Family Procedure Rules updates, carrying the amending rules and Practice Direction Update No. 3 of 2026
- Family Procedure Rule Committee consultation on the standards required for expert witnesses, which sets out the reasoning behind the drafting
Our news report is at Children proceedings now require a regulated expert. The wider Family Procedure Rules package is covered in our roundup on small claims, criminal legal aid and family procedure.
Date last updated
4 August 2026. The rule has been in force for a fortnight and no reported decision has yet applied it. This page will be updated when the court’s approach to the unavailability exception is tested.