Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Latest articles
One in four family lawyers contemplates leaving the profession, Resolution reveals
A quarter of family justice professionals are on the verge of quitting the profession as the toll of lockdown on their mental health becomes clear, the family law group Resolution revealed today,...
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
Misogyny as a hate crime – what it means and why it’s needed
In recent weeks, the government announced that it will instruct all police forces across the UK to start recording crimes motivated by sex or gender on an experimental basis- effectively making...
View all articles

Children's Involvement in Court

Sep 29, 2018, 17:36 PM
Slug : children-s-involvement-in-court
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jan 25, 2006, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 88759

At the Children Law UK conference in December 2005, the President of the Family Division, Sir Mark Potter stated:

'I would like to finish with a thought which may provoke discussion, and that is whether we should review the reluctance of the English judge to talk to children in private. This regularly occurs on the continent of Europe. Wall LJ notes in Mabon v Mabon that this reluctance is rooted in the rules of evidence and the adversarial mode of trial; that what is said in private by the child to the judge cannot be tested in evidence or in cross-examination; and that the judge cannot therefore promise confidentiality. In an effort to ensure the welfare and happiness of the children, and to listen to their voice first-hand should we not be encouraging judges to talk to the children in private, trusting the judge who has done so to retail the burden of his concerns as a result, whilst respecting the confidence of the child in sensitive areas.'

In Every Child Matters (Department of Health, 2003) the Government stressed the importance of involving children and young people and listening to their views.

District Judge Nicholas Crichton says there is a growing feeling that courts need to accommodate the wishes of children to be heard or to take ownership of some part of the proceedings, in which decisions will be taken which will have an important bearing on their lives. Some children may want only to meet the judge who will make the decision, either before the hearing to make sure that the judge has understood their wishes and feelings; or after the hearing to have the decision explained to them. Some may want to give evidence. Some may prefer not to take any part and to leave the decision to the court. What is important is that the alternatives are discussed with the child and that he/she should be given the choice. This means providing the child with the information to enable him/her to understand the whole process, and then discussing it with him/her in order to establish how best to meet his/her individual needs in relation to a process which has the potential to affect the rest of his/her life.

See March [2006] Fam Law 170 for the full news article by District Judge Nicholas Crichton.

Click here if you subscribe to the Family Law journal online.

The Court of Appeal's decision in Mabon v Mabon can be found in [2005] 2 FLR 1011.

Click here if you subscribe to the Family Law Reports online.

Categories :
  • News
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from