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
Whatever happened to the judiciary’s McKenzie Friends consultation?

Whatever happened to the judiciary’s McKenzie Friends consultation?

by Paul M | Feb 27, 2018 | Comment, Consultations

In February 2016, the then Lord Chief Justice, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, and the Judicial Executive Board issued a consultation entitled “Reforming the courts’ approach to McKenzie Friends”. It followed an internal report by a judicial working group and sought...
New approach to media cases at the Royal Courts of Justice is a welcome development

New approach to media cases at the Royal Courts of Justice is a welcome development

by Judith Townend | Feb 27, 2018 | Comment, Consultations

This is an edited version of an article which first appeared in Communications Law journal, volume 23, issue 1 (Bloomsbury Professional) and PA Media Lawyer and is re-published here with permission and thanks. In 2012 Mr Justice Tugendhat, ahead of his retirement in...
Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

by reporting watch team | Feb 26, 2018 | 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 COURT CASES NSPCC – We followed up blog...
Mum wins appeal about her child’s potential adoption but still has to pay her own legal costs – why?

Mum wins appeal about her child’s potential adoption but still has to pay her own legal costs – why?

by reporting watch team | Feb 25, 2018 | Cases, Comment, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

Proportionality and no order for costs in discharge order proceedings – Discharge order appeal The recent care case of M (A Child) [2018] EWCA Civ 240 (judgment: 20 February 2018) has achieved some notoriety because the mother, who won her appeal, still had to...
On Her Majesty’s Secret [Court] Service, or ‘Billionaire Putin crony loses right to secrecy in Britain’

On Her Majesty’s Secret [Court] Service, or ‘Billionaire Putin crony loses right to secrecy in Britain’

by Paul M | Feb 25, 2018 | Analysis, Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

“Secrecy in the court system is a growing concern. The press has a duty to uphold the principle of open justice and act as the eyes and ears of the public in the courts. The Times will resist any attempts to erode those principles.” So concludes a front page story in...
« Older Entries

Subscribe to our posts

Recent Comments

  • 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
  • Rufus badoofus on To name or not to name – that is the question
  • Liam on Cafcass new domestic abuse policy – an explainer

Search for something in particular

More search options

February 2018
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728  
« Jan   Mar »
  • 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