Behind this judgment is a long history which causes me considerable concern. However, as is often the case it would be contempt of court to say what the concerns are.
However, the fact that this has been prevented from being considered before the Court of Appeal even on paper does cause me further concern ... more later.
Comments
But what we can say, the Government voted for the changes, and I feel we are mixing law and politics.
Not too sure if this would be of any help at this stage but here goes!
It was Directed in that as soon as an appellants notice is filed in the COA regarding Family Matters the Application passes to a Judge to determine swiftly what if any papers are required, obviously in most instances it will no doubt be transcripts of Judgments, I am deeply surprised that there is no mention of it in this Judgment, unless he was not reminded of it from the outset.
that case was another Re.C
C (A Child) [2013] EWCA Civ 431
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed113501
"In every case where an application to the Court of Appeal is made for permission to appeal against the making of a placement order (or of any order consequent upon the making of a placement order) the following steps must be taken (and when I say must I mean must):
i) The appellant's notice must be filed as soon as possible.
ii) Those advising the appellant must give careful thought to including in the appellant's notice any appropriate application for a stay or other interim relief.
iii) If a transcript of the judgment being appealed against is not then available:
a) the appellant's notice must be accompanied by whatever note of the judgment (even if unapproved) is available; and
b) the transcript must be ordered immediately.
iv) When an application for a transcript is received, the court from which the appeal is being brought must deal with the application immediately.
v) Respondents who are parties to any application consequential upon the placement order (eg, an application for an adoption order) must immediately inform both the appellant and the Court of Appeal of:
a) the fact of the making of the application; and
b) the date(s) of any hearing of the application.
"I invite the relevant supervising Lords Justices and the Master of the Rolls to consider a change to the present practice in the Court of Appeal. That practice, properly followed in the present case by those handling the papers in the CAO, is that an application for permission to appeal is normally not put before a Lord Justice until the bundle is complete, in particular until the transcript is available. As a general practice that is, no doubt, entirely appropriate, but there must be cases where the delay that it necessarily imposes cannot be afforded. In the context of family appeals, the present class of case is one; another (not least because of the very strict time limits on such cases which Parliament is shortly to impose) is where the proposed appeal is against an interim case management decision in a care case. In such cases there is a powerful argument for saying that, irrespective of the contents of whatever bundle has been lodged with the CAO, the papers should be put before a Lord Justice as soon as the appellant's notice is received so that immediate directions can be given if appropriate."
The Judgement reads as if JFF threw everything possible at the case.