header-logo header-logo

23 June 2017
Issue: 7751 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Judge meets the child

Q What is the current judicial policy concerning the judge on a Children Act 1989 application seeing the child in person? If that happens, to what extent is the judge compelled to report to the parties on the outcome of the meeting and should the child be told that there is to be full disclosure, if that is to happen?

A The courts follow the detailed Guidelines for Judges Meeting Children issued by the Family Justice Council in 2010. Whether to meet the child is in the discretion of the judge having regard to the purpose of the meeting, the stage of the proceedings and the arrangements which can be made, though where a child expresses a wish to see the judge (particularly in a public law case) then the judge would ordinarily agree. The purpose is not to obtain evidence but to enable the child to gain an understanding of what is going on and to be reassured that they have been understood by the judge. Any meeting should be in the presence

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll