Spotlight
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...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
Unequal chances? Ethnic disproportionality in child welfare and family justice
Many have experienced their own Black Lives Matter moment in the last 12 months, a sharp realisation of entrenched prejudices and inequalities that still exist in our society.In the family justice...
Changes to the law on Domestic Abuse
Official statistics (ONS (2016), March 2015 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW)) show that around 2 million people suffer from some form of domestic abuse each year in the UK. In...
Managing costs in complex children cases
In November 2020 Spice Girl Mel B was in the news, despairing about how the legal costs of trying to relocate her daughter Madison from the US to England were likely to bankrupt her, leading to her...
View all articles
Authors

Judicial Family Policy

Sep 29, 2018, 17:28 PM
Slug : judicial-family-policy
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 7, 2006, 11:19 AM
Article ID : 86677

At the same conference, and in the same week as Mr Justice Munby gave his judgment in Re Webster (see 'Cases' below) Lord Justice Wall repeated his views on open family courts as expressed in the Hershman-Levy lecture in June 2006 and the September issue of Family Law at [2006] Fam Law 747. His position (in favour of giving the media and in practice the Press access to family proceedings, provided that there were clear ground rules about what they could and could not report) was in substantial agreement with the response to the Government consultation paper by the substantial majority of the High Court Judges of the Family Division, put forward by the President on their behalf. His Lordship did not however favour, indeed was opposed to, the admission of the public into family courts, even given the qualification that there would be a judicial discretion to exclude the public in certain circumstances. Lord Justice Wall then gave his opinion on some particular issues raised by the consultation paper. See December [2006] Fam Law for the full news item.

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