Posts
Defamation and domestic abuse – an update
The judgment in Lee v Brown [2022] 1699 EWHC (QB) has now been published on TNA. We wrote about the case after I attended one day of a hearing on 20 June. This update isn’t going to go into detail on defamation law but will, I hope, explain further why I...
Archie Battersbee Case – The hearing in the Court of Appeal
Background on the case so far The case concerns 12-year-old Archie, who is currently receiving mechanical ventilation in hospital following an accident in the home in April 2022, which led to brain damage. In May, the court granted permission for Archie to receive...
The National Archives and Family Court transparency – a temporary glitch?
The drive over the last decade toward greater Family Court transparency has been hugely dependent on the rapid and efficient publication of judgments by BAILII. So when, last year, it was announced that The National Archives would be taking over the primary function...
Remote observation of court hearings – new rules
UPDATE 24 JULY: This post has been amended to further clarify the position in the Court of Protection. From today, Tuesday 28 June 2022, courts will have new powers to allow journalists and members of the public to observe hearings remotely. While many judges will now...
Domestic abuse and defamation
This is a post about a defamation trial where one party (the claimant - C) is claiming the other party (the defendant - D) has caused his reputation serious harm by making statements that allege domestic abuse by C against D. Far removed from the recent Depp-Heard...
The unintended consequences of law – a postscript
Not long ago I wrote a tiresomely long post about what I will call the transparency in financial remedy (FR) cases, a topic about which there has been much recent debate (see Very Much Ancillary). Others may quibble about the use of the term ‘transparency’ but to me...
Another Financial Remedy case where anonymity was refused
The recent judgment in the case of Gallagher v Gallagher (No.1) (Reporting Restrictions) [2022] EWFC 52 is a sequel to the previously anonymised case of XZ v YZ [2022] EWFC 49. As the title suggests, having made an interim anonymity order, Mr Justice Mostyn decided in...
When family members apply to become parties: A hidden and “private” (but not sinister and secret) hearing
In the first of two linked guest posts, Celia Kitzinger explains the problem with the confusing and inconsistent way Court of Protection cases are currently listed, making it more difficult for public observers to attend the hearing. (This post is reproduced with...
Why are so many Court of Protection hearings labelled “PRIVATE”?
This guest post by Celia Kitzinger is an APPENDIX to her post When family members apply to become parties: A hidden and “private” (but not sinister and secret) hearing Several of my previous blog posts lament the fact that so many Court of Protection hearings are...
Barring orders – strengthened guidance on section 91(14) to stop repeated applications
Parents who live under the shadow of constant threats by ex-partners of being taken back to court, with repeated applications about their children, will now get more protection from this happening.“Barring orders” is the name commonly given to orders the Family Court...