Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

• 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

Mother wins court battle to change child’s ‘tainted’ middle name –  The Telegraph reported a family court case in which a mother who no longer liked her child’s middle name won the right to have it removed in a legal challenge costing thousands of pounds in legal aid – apparently illustrating that our legal aid system is broken. Thanks @hjbrander @jerrylonsdale.  Post to follow:

 

Ten Cases Like Charlie Gard’s Heard in English Courts this Year – A Guardian report based on figures apparently provided by Cafcass. We will blog in due course on some apparent misapprehensions here too:

 

Local News Matters: 

The Argus reported the Serious Case Review of siblings W and X, published by Brighton and Hove Local Safeguarding Children’s Board, followed by several national publishers and broadcasters including the Guardian,  the Independent and Sky News.

 

NEWLY PUBLISHED CASES FOR EXPLANATION OR COMMENT

 

Great Ormond Street Hospital v Yates and Gard – The final Order and Judgement of Mr Justice Francis were published by the Judicial Office:

 

Charlie’s parents made a short announcement to confirm Charlie’s death on Friday.

The proceedings have raised important issues warranting analysis and discussion. We haven’t posted further blogs for now, as a gesture of respect and condolence at this time but will write again in due course. In the meantime, our blog from earlier this week features in ‘Other Transparency News’ below.

 

Southend Borough Council v CO & Anor – Mr Justice MacDonald helpfully set out and analysed the law on publication of information about family court cases. Blog to follow. In the meantime see Suspicious Minds blog below:

 

 

A (Letter to a Young Person) (26 July 2017) – Mr Justice Peter Jackson J (soon to be Lord Justice of Appeal) attracted universal praise for his exceptional, child-focused and transparent approach, in publishing a judgment in the form of an open letter to a young man whose views he departed from. Both parents were unrepresented in the family court and we capture just a few of the numerous positive comments and reports on the decision below:

 

IN OTHER TRANSPARENCY NEWS

If it’s excellent, can it ever be futile?  – We commented on Further thoughts* about family law in a post-truth world at the Marilyn Stowe blog site:

 

Achievement Unlocked: Our Experience of the IPSO process – We comment on some difficulties in the process behind the ‘resolution statement’ recently published by IPSO, in response to our complaint about a column by Christopher Booker in the Telegraph on a Court of Protection case:

 

Letting Facts Get in the Way –  Lucy Reed (Chair of the Transparency Project) explains the Project in Counsel Magazine – an initiative to correct sensationalist and lazy journalism and encourage healthier debate about the law:

 

 

 

 

Kindertotenlieder and the limits of transparency – Barbara Rich considers the implications of the reporting and commentary in GOSH v Yates and Gard  for transparency in future cases of this type, and for public legal education and understanding of the law:

 

 

Feature pic: Courtesy of Flickr Lauri Heikkinenon via Creative Commons licence – thanks