Coulibaly v Coulibaly & Ors (Alleged incompatibility of the Children Act 1989 with the ECHR) (Rev 1) [2018] EWHC 936 (Fam).

Full post: suesspiciousminds

Care proceedings and diplomatic immunity

A Local Authority v X and Others 2018.

Full post: suesspiciousminds

Alfie Evans ~ a profoundly difficult case

The courts are called upon to make difficult decisions touching on all aspects of our human existence but the most profoundly difficult decisions are in those tragic cases where a child is in hospital with an incurable condition. 

Full post: Law and Lawyers

It’s not my job to believe you – here’s why

I had to do the 'it's not my job to believe you' talk to a client recently. I thought it might be a useful topic to discuss on the blog, because it is so often a source of worry and confusion for people unfamiliar with taking advice from a barrister.

Full post: Pink Tape

Journalism, Judges and Justice – a crisis in court reporting?

A report on Open Justice from the Chartered Institute of Journalists warns of “an unprecedented, and sustained, attack on the journalism profession, which has taken a toll on our ability to cover courts, and report on their function”.

Full post: The Transparency Project

Magical sparkle powers, secure accommodation and consent

A Local Authority v SW and Others 2018.

Full post: suesspiciousminds

Discrimination in the courts? Waggott v Waggott by Phoebe Turner

In the so-called “meal ticket for life” appeal case of Waggott v Waggott, Kim Waggott, the former wife of William Waggott, lost her joint lives maintenance award and the court rejected the argument that earning capacity is a resource subject to the sharing principle upon the breakdown of marriage.

Full post: Stowe Family Law Blog

Three examples of how not to do family justice

This week involves a trio of disastrous cases where things have gone wrong and judges have explained why.

Full post: The Transparency Project

Litigant’s claim struck out for discussing case during break in giving evidence – a cautionary tale

It’s one of the cardinal rules of court procedure: once you’ve entered the witness box and started to give evidence, you mustn’t discuss the case with anyone outside court, if there’s a break in the proceedings, until you’ve finished giving evidence.

Full post: The Transparency Project

Meal ticket for life bid backfires – or does it?

The Telegraph is one of a number of newspapers to report on the decision of the Court of Appeal to refuse the appeal of Mrs Waggott asking for an increase in her divorce award, and to allow the appeal of Mr Waggot, asking for the duration of her maintenance award to be limited.

Full post: The Transparency Project

“I completely forgot”

P (A Child), Re [2018] EWCA Civ 720 (11 April 2018).

Full post: suesspiciousminds

Financial Remedy Court pilots

In January 2018, the President of the Family Division, Sir James Munby, issued his 18th View from the President’s Chambers, dealing with the launch of the Financial Remedy Court (FRC) pilots and the proposed structure and geography of the FRC.

Full post: Family Law Blog

Why doesn’t the family court punish professionals who break the rules?

What happens when the professionals in family cases – the local authority, social worker or CAFCASS – don’t obey court orders?

Full post: The Transparency Project

Hearing the child in family courts: legal aid and recent cases

A child’s views according to age and maturity.

Full post: dbfamilylaw

Hearing the child in family courts

Giving weight to the views of a child in family proceedings.

Full post: dbfamilylaw

Sergei And Yulia Skripal And The Court Of Protection

What are a person’s best interests in a decision to permit use of samples of body fluids or tissue for a purpose which is neither of direct therapeutic benefit to the person him or herself, or an act of direct altruism towards another person?

Full post: The Transparency Project

Fit for the future: transforming the court and tribunal estate

The Transparency Project’s response to the MOJ consultation.

Full post: The Transparency Project

Bloomin’ eck! Divorcing fraudster named and shamed but the papers ignore it

Recorder Cusworth has delivered three judgments in this case – although they go back as far as the start of last year, they were only published at the end of the case, once the judge had comprehensively set out all of the lies and frauds that had been exposed and explained why he could not believe a word that Mr Bloom said .

Full post: The Transparency Project