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
The most secretive court in all of Christendom…

The most secretive court in all of Christendom…

by reporting watch team | Aug 31, 2017 | Analysis, Cases, Comment, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

Recent coverage of the placement of a 5 year old Christian girl with a muslim foster family that spoke no English has generated much outrage and media attention this week. But as more information emerges it is becoming clear that things are more complex and less clear...
Are we still ‘Amusing Ourselves to Death’ and if so, at what cost to children?

Are we still ‘Amusing Ourselves to Death’ and if so, at what cost to children?

by reporting watch team | Aug 30, 2017 | Comment

This is a guest blog post by Marion Oswald Senior Fellow at The Centre for Information Rights, University of Winchester, examining the British and Irish Law Education and Technology Association (BILETA) consultation run by The Centre of Information Rights. The...
Cafcass response to the Transparency Project comments on their draft revised Framework

Cafcass response to the Transparency Project comments on their draft revised Framework

by reporting watch team | Aug 30, 2017 | Comment, Consultations

On 11 August, the Cafcass policy and communications team emailed us in reply to our comments on their revised framework. We explain what they said below. We will now write again, as well as alert them to this blog through twitter. They told us (our summary not their...
Primacy of children’s interests in the publicity debate

Primacy of children’s interests in the publicity debate

by David Burrows | Aug 29, 2017 | Analysis, Cases, Comment, Transparency News

Freedom of expression: are children’s interests ‘paramount’?   In her update on transparency on the Transparency Project blog ‘Lucy R’  raised what has been said by Sir James Munby P: that ‘the interests of the child are NOT paramount on questions of...
Mother jailed for contempt could be named despite her young child being involved in anonymised family court proceedings. Why?

Mother jailed for contempt could be named despite her young child being involved in anonymised family court proceedings. Why?

by Paul M | Aug 28, 2017 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

To those accustomed to the idea that the family courts sit “behind closed doors” it may seem surprising for a judge to tell journalists they could name a woman who was being jailed for contempt of court, even though her three-year-old daughter was caught up in a...
« Older Entries

Subscribe to our posts

Recent Comments

  • 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
  • Julie Doughty on ASSISTED DYING: WHAT ROLE FOR THE PANEL? Thoughts on the latest (amended) proposals

Search for something in particular

More search options

August 2017
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  
« Jul   Sep »
  • 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