CS v SBH: a child’s competence to appoint her own lawyer

This case concerned the question whether, on an appeal, a child was entitled to choose and be represented by a solicitor of her own choice, instead of the solicitor already instructed by the court-appointed guardian.

Full post: The Transparency Project

Transparency and judicial bias – a review in 2019

Common law ‘transparency’.

Full post: dbfamilylaw

‘Guidance’ as law

David Burrows considers the status of judicially-issued practice guidance in the hierarchy of judge-made and statutory law, and questions its use as a shortcut for more formally generated procedural rules.

Full post: ICLR Blog

Social work spies? (Yes, you over there I’m talking to you…)

Social workers ‘spying’ on families through Facebook.

Full post: Pink Tape

“Unnourished by sense.”

M v P [2019] EWFC 14 (22 March 2019).

Full post: suesspiciousminds

Not a vacuum but a low pressure vessel

CS v SBH & Ors [2019] EWHC 634 (Fam) (18 March 2019).

Full post: suesspiciousminds

Should a Local Authority serve notice of proceedings on a father suspected of abusing the mother?

P (Notice of care proceedings to father without parental responsibility) [2019] EWFC 13 (11 March 2019).

Full post: suesspiciousminds

Contempt of court: ‘publication’ and children proceedings

The tentacles of court contempt.

Full post: dbfamilylaw

I call humbug

The poor practice, serious mistakes and sometimes unlawful actions of people working in the family law system are almost always hidden.

Full post: The Transparency Project

The President’s guidance on anonymisation in published judgments

On 7 December 2018, Sir Andrew McFarlane, the President of the Family Division, issued some practice guidance to judges entitled Practice Guidance: anonymisation and avoidance of the identification of children and the treatment of explicit descriptions of the sexual abuse of children in judgments intended for the public arena.

Full post: The Transparency Project

Judgment critical of delay from expert

X and Y (Delay : Professional Conduct of Expert) [2019] EWFC B9 (11 March 2019).

Full post: suesspiciousminds

Child rights: politics or law

Judicial review and the ‘political arena’.

Full post: dbfamilylaw

Capacity to use the internet

Two recent judgments in the Court of Protection sparked the usual inaccurate headlines suggesting that the court had ridden roughshod over the rights of adults with learning difficulties to access the internet, and more specifically social media.

Full post: The Transparency Project

Court of Appeal decision about orders for post-adoption contact

Re B (A Child) (Post-adoption contact) [2019] EWCA Civ 29 is the first time (since a change in the law in 2014) that the Court of Appeal has considered when an order should be made that an adopted child will have continuing contact with their birth family after he or she is adopted.

Full post: The Transparency Project

Reporting restrictions and the James Bulger murder

Venables & Anor v News Group Papers Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 494 (Fam) (4 March 2019).

Full post: UK Human Rights Blog

Can you make an Interim Care Order that lasts beyond the child’s 17th birthday?

Re Q (A Child: Interim Care Order) 2019.

Full post: suesspiciousminds

Best evidence of complainants and children

In Y and E (Children) (Sexual Abuse Allegations) [2019] EWCA Civ 206 (21 February 2019) Baker LJ drew attention to the importance of ABE evidence gathering.

Full post: dbfamilylaw

Lay representation in civil proceedings

McKenzie friends in 2019: a debate….

Full post: dbfamilylaw

NOT reforming the courts’ approach to McKenzie Friends: a judicial abdication of responsibility

In 2016, the Lord Chief Justice and the JEB issued a consultation entitled “Reforming the courts’ approach to McKenzie Friends”. Three years later, they have responded with a series of recommendations that basically involve blaming the government for the problem and suggesting that the government, not the judiciary, should sort it out.

Full post: The Transparency Project