Skip to main content

Judges miss the point on Second Opinions

The link is to today's judgment in the Webster case. It should not require an application to the court of appeal for someone to ask around to find if there is an alternative legal position.

This creates a mass of legal costs and a substantial procedural threshold to get what is relatively straightforward.

Second opinions should be available as of right.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Why can't they have their children returned? Why can't the children have their say in all of this.

It seems more about pleasing adopters again than doing what is right.

What is the point of admitting to a miscarriage of justice if there is no justice in the end.

children have been returned after 2 years in care. If the process wasnt so slow they could have got them back.

If the relatives had looked after the children they could have gone back to their parents.Social Services tactics are too make weak excuses for not allowing children to go to relatives,thus making sure the children will never see their parents again.

Draconian state.
9:13 pm
Anonymous said…
I like the way the judges whilst admitting an error occurred (in a limited way) justified that everything done was “sound”.

The judges can side with you but against you at the same time, it does not make sense.
2:46 pm
McKenzief said…
Where is the judgement about 2nd opinions...the European Court judgement that allows 2nd opinions? well done for bringing this to the notice of the world. Yes 'experts' are beholden to Cafcass who give them work and yes in turn they write what the officer/guardian demands. a new judgement comes out next week re Contempt of Guardian in an application to dismiss a Guardian, heard by The President as it was his rules that were broken (well the judgement will say rules were broken or they were not - if not its fudged!).
9:27 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Six months for recording a court hearing - Norman Scarth

The link is in Russian about the imprisonment of Norman Scarth who is actually 85. He has a complex history including a court hearing which found that he used a chainsaw to fight off bailiffs when he was 75. [a court judgment which is disputed see comments] However, that does not justify imprisoning him for 6 months for recording a court hearing (see the link and ask google to translate it if your Russian is not up to it). It has got into the Argyll News Because he has been held such that people cannot get to him to sign paperwork an application for a writ of Habeas Corpus was made today. This has been adjourned until next week. The English judicial system is really not good at responding to major abuses of human rights by the judicial system.
57 comments
Read more