header-logo header-logo

26 March 2009 / Edward Floyd
Issue: 7362 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Behind closed doors

Edward Floyd considers the pros & cons of a more transparent family justice system

There is a great deal of momentum towards increasing transparency in the family courts. The government held two consultations in 2006 and 2007, with the most recent findings published on 16 December 2008 in the Ministry of Justice's publication, Family Justice in View. The media has waged a campaign against a system which it alleges consists of secretive proceedings held in private, a lack of accountability for public servants, and an absence of public scrutiny of decisions. This is not a new debate, and the longevity of the discourse may lie in the fact that there is a corresponding and sometimes competing imperative to respect the Art 8 rights of privacy of the individuals involved in family cases.

The Lord Chancellor, Jack Straw, introduced his proposals in his oral address to the House of Commons as “strik[ing] the right balance in providing a more open, transparent and accountable system and while protecting children and families during a difficult and traumatic time

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll