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
Recusal refusal: judge declines to step down in response to litigant’s suspicions of apparent bias

Recusal refusal: judge declines to step down in response to litigant’s suspicions of apparent bias

by Paul M | Jul 17, 2020 | Cases, Comment, Explanation

In an earlier post we described how a judge refused to allow a McKenzie Friend to speak in court on behalf of a litigant in person. In a further judgment in the same case, Ameyaw v McGoldrick [2020] EWHC 1787 (QB), Mrs Justice Steyn refused the litigant’s application...
A remote private FDR in an ordinary case

A remote private FDR in an ordinary case

by reporting watch team | Jul 15, 2020 | FCReportingWatch

This is a guest post from an anonymous contributor. Context A financial dispute resolution hearing (or “FDR”) is an essential appointment in a financial remedies application, when divorcing couples need to sort out their finances and property. A judge will hear brief...
WHO DECIDES WHO DECIDES? WITHDRAWAL OF CARE PROCEEDINGS

WHO DECIDES WHO DECIDES? WITHDRAWAL OF CARE PROCEEDINGS

by Guest Post | Jul 14, 2020 | Analysis, Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

This is a guest post by Laura Vickers. Laura is a specialist children law barrister and mediator practising at No5 Barristers’ Chambers. She tweets as @LauraVickersNo5 Where a local authority determines that the medical evidence falls short of proving that...
The family court and vulnerable people

The family court and vulnerable people

by Jack Harrison | Jul 11, 2020 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

What approach should the family court adopt when dealing with vulnerable people and those with disabilities?  Judges and magistrates of the family court deal with some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Quite often, people will find it difficult to...
Another view on the government ‘spotlight review’ report – on how the family courts treat domestic abuse

Another view on the government ‘spotlight review’ report – on how the family courts treat domestic abuse

by Guest Post | Jul 8, 2020 | Comment, FCReportingWatch, Transparency News

This is a guest post by Ursula Rice. Ursula is a Solicitor-Advocate and Director at Family First Solicitors. She tweets as @tweetygraffity. We hope to publish more posts about this Review in the coming days. You can read previous posts here and here. On...
« Older Entries
Next Entries »

Subscribe to our posts

Recent Comments

  • Julie Doughty on ASSISTED DYING: WHAT ROLE FOR THE PANEL? Thoughts on the latest (amended) proposals
  • Julia on Completing care proceedings in less than 26 weeks
  • Lucy on Mums on the run
  • Julie Doughty on Does a reporter have to be in court to read confidential documents?
  • Social Work Observer on Do social workers have a duty of care to protect children of local authority tenants?

Search for something in particular

More search options

July 2020
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  
« Jun   Aug »
  • 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