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 Supreme Court Is Wrong on Charlie Gard and Withdrawal of Treatment

The Supreme Court Is Wrong on Charlie Gard and Withdrawal of Treatment

by Allan Norman | Jun 12, 2017 | Analysis, Cases, Comment, Explanation, FCReportingWatch, Notorious

In the matter of Charlie Gard – Permission to appeal hearing [here]. [Other posts on our blog about this case can be found here] This is a case with intense poignancy. Charlie Gard is so seriously ill that it appears undisputed that he will never lead a full...
 Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children -v- Gard – update

 Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children -v- Gard – update

by Emma Nottingham | Jun 11, 2017 | Analysis, Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch, Notorious

Supreme Court decides that permission to appeal must be refused. Case being considered by Human Rights Court. Earlier posts about this case can be found here and here. The case concerned an eight-month-old child, Charlie Gard, who suffers from Mitochondrial Depletion...
Re J : Unfair Care Orders Overturned on Appeal

Re J : Unfair Care Orders Overturned on Appeal

by reporting watch team | May 30, 2017 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

In Re J (Children) [2017] EWCA Civ 398 (23 May 2017) the Court of Appeal allow an appeal from His Honour Judge Tolson QC, overturning care orders that he had made at an Issues Resolution Hearing (IRH). An IRH is a penultimate hearing, which is generally fixed once all...
Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children -v- Gard

Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children -v- Gard

by Emma Nottingham | May 27, 2017 | Analysis, Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch, Notorious

Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children -v- Gard This blog post updates a previous post here  The Court of Appeal has decided that the treatment of Charlie Gard can be withdrawn. The case concerned an eight-month-old child, Charlie Gard, who suffers from...
Seriously inaccurate reporting by omission of facts

Seriously inaccurate reporting by omission of facts

by reporting watch team | May 23, 2017 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch, Notorious

[UPDATE 25 May 2017: Further blog post on this case here : Judge flags complaint on behalf of child against journalist who sneaked into hospital] We posted a short blog yesterday noting that The (Sunday) Telegraph’s Christopher Booker had reported on a case...
Decision to place a child with prospective adopters is unlawful because unfair

Decision to place a child with prospective adopters is unlawful because unfair

by reporting watch team | May 22, 2017 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

R (On the Application Of EL) v Essex County Council [2017] EWHC 1041 (Admin) (08 May 2017) is a judicial review decision about a decision by a local authority to place a child for adoption, under a placement order granted by the Family Court. Because this is a...
« Older Entries
Next Entries »

Subscribe to our posts

Recent Comments

  • Anon on Why doesn’t the family court punish professionals who break the rules?
  • Louisa Biggs on Hair strand testing – pitfalls and limitations
  • Lainie on ‘Oh I’m sorry, did I forget to mention you don’t have to agree to this?’ When social workers forget that interventions under ‘Child in Need’ are voluntary
  • Julie Doughty on ‘Habitual Residence’ – sloppy explanations of the law about child abduction
  • Sidisi Henry on ‘Habitual Residence’ – sloppy explanations of the law about child abduction

Search for something in particular

More search options

May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    
  • 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 care proceedings child protection children's views committal contempt of court correctionrequests court of protection covid CPConf2016 divorce domestic abuse domesticabuse domestic violence Expert Evidence. experts finances financial remedy FLJ forced adoption guidancenote Human Rights Act 1998 judgments judiciary legal aid legalbloggingpilot misconduct open justice parental alienation pathfinder privacy privacy injunctions 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.