info@transparencyproject.org.uk
  • Facebook
  • X
  • Facebook
  • X
The Transparency Project
  • Legal Blogging
  • Posts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • About
  • Who
  • Dictionary
  • Resources
  • Media
  • More search options
Select Page
Decision to place a child with prospective adopters is unlawful because unfair

Decision to place a child with prospective adopters is unlawful because unfair

by reporting watch team | May 22, 2017 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

R (On the Application Of EL) v Essex County Council [2017] EWHC 1041 (Admin) (08 May 2017) is a judicial review decision about a decision by a local authority to place a child for adoption, under a placement order granted by the Family Court. Because this is a...
Separating the divorce from the money bit

Separating the divorce from the money bit

by reporting watch team | May 21, 2017 | FCReportingWatch

When married couples and civil partners separate there are two (or three) parts to the legal arrangements : getting divorced (called dissolution if you are in a civil partnership), sorting out the money, and sorting out arrangements for any children. The way the law...
Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

by reporting watch team | May 20, 2017 | FCReportingWatch

Correcting, clarifying or commenting on media reports of family court cases Explaining or commenting on published Judgments of family court cases Highlighting other transparency news   MEDIA (MIS)REPORTS OF FAMILY COURTS CASES    As yet unclear Police...
Police investigating drug testing lab that carried out tests for the Family Court

Police investigating drug testing lab that carried out tests for the Family Court

by reporting watch team | May 20, 2017 | Cases, FCReportingWatch

There have been news reports recently about failures at a forensic lab in Manchester, which was used for forensic testing in criminal cases. It was reported earlier this month that “Scores of convictions [are] in doubt amid forensic test manipulation...
“Top Judge threatens to down tools rather than allow victims to be quizzed by abusers in his court”

“Top Judge threatens to down tools rather than allow victims to be quizzed by abusers in his court”

by reporting watch team | May 19, 2017 | Cases, Comment, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

…Or so we imagine the headlines may run if and when a member of the press reads as far as the bottom few paragraphs of the unassuming A (A Minor : Fact Finding; Unrepresented Party) [2017] EWHC 1195 (Fam) (19 May 2017), a recent judgment of Mr Justice Anthony...
« Older Entries
Next Entries »

Subscribe to our posts

Recent Comments

  • Jennie on Completing care proceedings in less than 26 weeks
  • Julie Doughty on ‘Paedophiles to be stripped of parental rights’? and other failed legislative amendments
  • Anon on ‘Paedophiles to be stripped of parental rights’? and other failed legislative amendments
  • O Verit on Cross examination of medical experts – exceptional or exceptionally important?
  • DH on Completing care proceedings in less than 26 weeks

Search for something in particular

More search options

May 2017
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
« Apr   Jun »
  • Analysis
  • Cases
  • Comment
  • Consultations
  • Court of Protection
  • Dictionary
  • Events
  • Explanation
  • FCReportingWatch
  • FOI
  • Guidance Note
  • Legal blogging
  • Notorious
  • Open Reporting
  • Project
  • Reporting Pilot
  • Resources
  • Transparency News
  • Trends
  • Uncategorized

access to courts data adoption Adoption targets alienation anonymisation Article 8 Article 10 assisted dying Cafcass child protection committal contempt of court correctionrequests court of protection covid COVID-19 CPConf2016 divorce domestic abuse domesticabuse domestic violence Expert Evidence. experts finances financial remedy FLJ forced adoption guidancenote Human Rights Act 1998 judgments law courts legal aid legalbloggingpilot mckenzie friends misconduct Multi-disciplinary conference open justice parental alienation privacy injunctions psychologists publication remotejustice Section 20 agreements social work transparency

  • Facebook
  • X
The Transparency Project, Charity Number 1161471.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok