by reporting watch team | May 1, 2026 | Cases, Comment, FCReportingWatch
Between 5 and 7 April, a story was published on three associated local news sites in Dorset with the headline ‘Dorset court rules mother should have no contact with child’. The articles said that a judge in Bournemouth Family Court had made an order relating to a...
by Julie Doughty | May 1, 2026 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch
The Supreme Court judgment in Re X and Y (Children: Adoption Order: Setting Aside) [2026] UKSC 13 was published on 22 April. We had watched the hearing and we wrote about it in this post on 20 February – Undoing an adoption order: an update. We don’t have...
by reporting watch team | Apr 8, 2026 | Explanation, FCReportingWatch
You’ll often see this topic described as ‘stripping’ or ‘removing’ an abusive father’s parental rights but parental responsibility (PR) can’t often simply be taken away – although where the circumstances justify it, PR can be restricted or effectively...
by reporting watch team | Apr 7, 2026 | FCReportingWatch, Transparency News
The most senior judge in family courts is the President of the Family Division and Court of Protection, inevitably known in the media as ‘top family judge’. Shortly after Sir James Munby was appointed President, from April 2014, he began an innovative...
by reporting watch team | Apr 2, 2026 | Cases, FCReportingWatch, Transparency News
Welcome to the Roundup, where we correct, clarify and comment on media reports of family law, explain and comment on published family court judgments, and highlight other transparency news. MEDIA COVERAGE OF FAMILY LAW, TRANSPARENCY etc The Sunday Times (£) began the...
by reporting watch team | Apr 1, 2026 | Comment, FCReportingWatch
On 30 March, The Guardian published this editorial: ‘The Guardian view on family justice: transparency should help a flawed system to improve. Increased openness is a change for the better. But cuts have made the courts’ work far harder’ We have written...
Recent Comments