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
Solicitors in a state of flux

Solicitors in a state of flux

by reporting watch team | Sep 10, 2017 | Cases, Comment, FCReportingWatch, Notorious

This is a guest post by Mena Ruparel. Mena (@avoidgravity) is a solicitor and co-author of “How to be an ethical solicitor” published by Bath Publishing. On 31 August the Court of Appeal handed down the judgment in the big money case of Mr and Mrs Hart....
Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

by reporting watch team | Sep 10, 2017 | FCReportingWatch

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 The Times and other commentators...
The Project is shortlisted for an award

The Project is shortlisted for an award

by reporting watch team | Sep 6, 2017 | FCReportingWatch

We’re really pleased to have been shortlisted for the Jordans’ Family Law Commentator Of The Year award. The competition is pretty fierce, so who knows if we will win, but we are just happy to bask in the recognition of being shortlisted for now. Who gets...
Misreporting the misreporting – that foster care case again

Misreporting the misreporting – that foster care case again

by reporting watch team | Sep 5, 2017 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch, Notorious

We’ve written about the so-called “muslim foster care case” already (here and here). We’ve been somewhat critical of the coverage by The Times. But we are a little concerned that some of the criticism we have seen of media reports, particularly...
Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

Family Court Reporting Watch Roundup

by reporting watch team | Sep 3, 2017 | FCReportingWatch

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 The Times –  We commented on...
The most secretive court in all of Christendom…

The most secretive court in all of Christendom…

by reporting watch team | Aug 31, 2017 | Analysis, Cases, Comment, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

Recent coverage of the placement of a 5 year old Christian girl with a muslim foster family that spoke no English has generated much outrage and media attention this week. But as more information emerges it is becoming clear that things are more complex and less clear...
Are we still ‘Amusing Ourselves to Death’ and if so, at what cost to children?

Are we still ‘Amusing Ourselves to Death’ and if so, at what cost to children?

by reporting watch team | Aug 30, 2017 | Comment

This is a guest blog post by Marion Oswald Senior Fellow at The Centre for Information Rights, University of Winchester, examining the British and Irish Law Education and Technology Association (BILETA) consultation run by The Centre of Information Rights. The...
Cafcass response to the Transparency Project comments on their draft revised Framework

Cafcass response to the Transparency Project comments on their draft revised Framework

by reporting watch team | Aug 30, 2017 | Comment, Consultations

On 11 August, the Cafcass policy and communications team emailed us in reply to our comments on their revised framework. We explain what they said below. We will now write again, as well as alert them to this blog through twitter. They told us (our summary not their...
Primacy of children’s interests in the publicity debate

Primacy of children’s interests in the publicity debate

by David Burrows | Aug 29, 2017 | Analysis, Cases, Comment, Transparency News

Freedom of expression: are children’s interests ‘paramount’?   In her update on transparency on the Transparency Project blog ‘Lucy R’  raised what has been said by Sir James Munby P: that ‘the interests of the child are NOT paramount on questions of...
Mother jailed for contempt could be named despite her young child being involved in anonymised family court proceedings. Why?

Mother jailed for contempt could be named despite her young child being involved in anonymised family court proceedings. Why?

by Paul M | Aug 28, 2017 | Cases, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

To those accustomed to the idea that the family courts sit “behind closed doors” it may seem surprising for a judge to tell journalists they could name a woman who was being jailed for contempt of court, even though her three-year-old daughter was caught up in a...
« Older Entries
Next Entries »

Subscribe to our posts

Recent Comments

  • Hilary Searing on Sara Sharif -what we now know from the Safeguarding Review
  • Thoughtful 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
  • Bayes on Trying to report the family courts – a BBC reporter’s experience
  • Diana Jordan on Repealing ‘the presumption” – an explainer
  • Sarah 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

Search for something in particular

More search options

December 2025
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
« Nov    
  • 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 assisted dying Cafcass care proceedings child protection children's views 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 open justice parental alienation privacy 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.