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
An order for ‘no contact’ at West London Family Court

An order for ‘no contact’ at West London Family Court

by Julie Doughty | Oct 10, 2025 | Cases, FCReportingWatch, Legal blogging

Earlier this month, I attended a private law hearing held at West London Family Court before His Honour Judge O’Donovan. The judge made a transparency order at the beginning of the hearing. There are some unusual aspects to this case, including a section 91(14) order...
Local authority support services in Wales and private law contact disputes: Re R-E

Local authority support services in Wales and private law contact disputes: Re R-E

by Julie Doughty | Feb 5, 2022 | Cases, Comment, Explanation, FCReportingWatch

This judgment, Re R-E (Contact: Support from local authorities in Wales) [2021] EWFC B95 from Pontypridd Family Court, published on BAILII a few days ago, has a number of unusual features. One is the outcome, that direct contact was found not to be in the...
Two new Griffiths judgments – what are they about?

Two new Griffiths judgments – what are they about?

by reporting watch team | Jan 23, 2022 | FCReportingWatch

Last week saw publication of two new judgments relating to the child of former MP, Andrew Griffiths, and current MP, Kate Griffiths. Here we summarise what those judgments are about and what they do (or don’t) tell us about matters of principle that might affect...

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.