Skip to main content

Justice for Families in The Times

It was nice to read the Leader in The Times Today which is linked and has the headline "Justice for Families".

This includes:
A large number of readers have told The Times this week that they have been denied access to papers that they need to mount an appeal.

The systematic raising of difficulties to prevent parents from appealing is one of the aspects of the system that I have particular concerns about. This leaves parents at the mercy of a single judge. Normally a particular family is reserved to a particular judge and if that judge takes a dislike to them they have no chance.

Normally the excuse used by their own solicitors for not giving them a copy of their own file is "they need the papers to get paid by the LSC." That does not, of course, prevent them from providing a copy of the file. It is, however, shocking how difficult it is to get both the judgment and the case files. Even if you get there papers get strangely lost in the Court of Appeal time and time again.

Rule No 1 with the court of appeal (Family Division) is to get a receipt for any papers handed in.

Comments

mary docherty said…
they don't want you to appeal,in most cases where people are "litigant in person",these people are not aware (or are so fearful) that they don't think to ask for a copy of the judgement.And this makes the process even longer as the litigant then has to chase up the paperwork.As in my case yesterday in front of judge pauffley,i got so upset and broke down.She (the judge) "abided" by any decision the LA solicitor deemed fit.It really makes my blood boil as the judge openly admitted (gave me the impression)that she had to abide by the decision made by the previous judge (coleridge) and "dared not" open herself to criticism by ruling in my favour.And so,yet another "gagging order" was "dished out".Even i didn't think to ask for a copy to be sent to me.
6:45 am
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why are babies born young?

Why are babies born young? This sounds like an odd question. People would say "of course babies are born young". However, this goes to the core of the question of human (or animal) development. Why is it that as time passes people develop initially through puberty and then for women through menopause and more generally getting diseases such as sarcopenia, osteoporosis, diabetes and cancer, but most of the time babies start showing no signs of this. Lots of research into this has happened over the years and now I think it is clear why this is. It raises some interesting questions. Biological youth is about how well a cell functions. Cells that are old in a biological sense don't work that well. One of the ways in which cells stop working is they fail to produce the full range of proteins. Generally the proteins that are produced from longer genes stop being produced. The reason for this relates to how the Genes work (the Genome). Because the genome is not gettin
1 comment
Read more