Friday, July 19, 2013

Friday Review: Guide me, O thou great Redeemer

Notable things this week:

I have already mentioned the latest missive from our esteemed President, View from the President's Chambers 4, together with its sundry annexes. I will not comment further upon the tidal wave of guidance under which family lawyers are now being drowned, save to say that I am glad that I am no longer practising as I would be scared to do anything, for fear of contravening the latest set of instructions upon the subject. I will, however, recommend that you read this post by Lucy Reed on Pink Tape, which gives some excellent guidance for the style of family blogs. I may follow it myself.

I have also already mentioned the research by Exeter University into enforcement of contact orders. Obviously, we will have to wait until the full report is published in September before coming to any firm conclusions, but it is interesting that the results seem to be broadly supportive of the very difficult job that the courts are doing in this area. If so, I suspect that this will not be music to the ears of some. It was particularly interesting to note this comment regarding the research on Twitter from Lucy Reed:

Meanwhile, the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill passed its Third Reading in the House of Lords on Monday and has now received the Royal Assent. I know the Bill may not be all that some had hoped for, but thankfully at least those who tried to wreck it failed. Or have they? I found this on Twitter:

Credit: Tom Freeman.

Lastly, more good news came this week with the judgment in the RCW v A Local Authority case, in which a prospective adopter who lost her sight after the removal of a brain tumour was granted the adoption order she sought. I do love happy endings.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.