Can a judge make orders about a child who isn’t a subject of the proceedings?
Nope, say the Court of Appeal in a really interesting judgment delivered this week, in which my super colleague Olivia Pike argued and won the appeal. See E (Section 37 Direction, The Children Act 1989), [2025] EWCA Civ 470. I'm glad this has been cleared up because we all know that every so often a judge makes an order under s37 about a child that isn't the subject of the proceedings. Not that often, but often enough. The only wonder is that it hasn't been appealed and clarified before now. The wording of s37 is undoubtedly tempting for a judge with a legitimate concern about a child she has become aware of that is connected to the family that is before the court, but not actually a part of the case. A provision that appears to apply to 'any child' is an alluring solution to this problem. To my knowledge these orders are made from time to time, and the scenario in the appeal isn't an outlier - the court is often provided with information about other children in a household, who...
Necessity is the mother of intermediaries
Judgment was handed down this morning in Re M (A Child: Intermediaries) [2025] EWCA Civ 440. I had a small non-speaking part (for the FLBA). The judgment is a delightfully streamlined read and brings some welcome clarity to the approach on the appointment of intermediaries. As my - frankly fabulous - post title suggests, necessity is the test, baby. Nothing else will do: Not compelling. Not rare. Not exceptional. Just plain old necessary. Lord Justice Peter Jackson had this to say about the various high court authorities from which these high bar tests have emerged (before going on to politely demolish them): In the three appeals about intermediaries that it has heard since Part 3A came into effect, this court has taken its provisions at face value. Considering that the regulatory framework is recent, it is unpromising ground for a wider exercise in judicial interpretation. So, the various High Court authorities suggesting necessity plus in various flavours can be put to one side,...
Bristol Cable Podcast
The Bristol Cable Podcast interviewed some local girl about transparency recently. No idea who she is, but have a listen if you fancy. https://thebristolcable.org/2025/02/listen-bristol-unpacked-barrister-lucy-reed-opening-secretive-family-courts-to-scrutiny/ Also recommended is BBC Radio 4 short 10 part series 'You do not have to say anything' featuring criminal defence barrister and sausage dog owner Joanna Hardy Susskind, and some other stars of the criminal bar that you will want to hear from (I won't spoil it for you). Really good explanation of how it works (and doesn't). Listen here. Lots more has been happening this week - New Guidance on judges writing letters to children (a big thumbs up on that), a reminder that we shouldn't be 'citing' cases that aren't citable (generally decisions of Circuit Judges and below aren't citable, just interesting!), and covert recording guidance... oh no, wait. Not that last one....
I may have been gone some time…
Posts are getting ever more infrequent around here. Doubtless in part because of my continuing inability to say 'no'. Having been on the verge of being virtually committee-less at the end of last year, I now find myself back on two committees (FLBA, Bar Council). The Transparency Project work continues, and I seem to be forever scrambling to keep on top of that. I am desperate to find some time to do more legal blogging (my last outing in October has been stuck in the mud for reasons I can't tell you about at the moment, so I've nothing to show for my endeavours on that front), and I've been flat out with work since December. On top of all that there has been lots happening at home so there is much to juggle. All excuses of course. I used to manage multiple posts a week whilst wrangling two toddlers and writing a book. I smile weakly whenever someone says to me 'Oh, I don't know how you manage it all', knowing of course that approximately once a week a plate goes careering off its...
Transparency and the Courts – Event
It is a principle of law that justice must be seen to be done - but sometimes for various reasons the court will order reporting restrictions on the proceedings as well as keeping certain matters confidential. The new Lady Chief Justice has set up a committee to examine transparency and the family court has just introduced reforms to make courts more open. Where should the line be drawn? Leading legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg will give a keynote speech at historic No 1 Court at the Old Bailey followed by discussion by an expert panel. There will be a networking drinks in the splendid grand hall. City & Legal Event: Transparency and the Courts Speaker: Joshua Rozenberg KC (Hon) Chair: Alderman & Sheriff Gregory Jones KC; Panel: Sanchia Berg (BBC Senior Correspondent, Nominee Orwell Prize 2023), Lucy Reed KC, Chair of The Transparency Project, author of The Family Court without a Lawyer A Handbook for Litigants in Person, HH Wendy Joseph KC (former Old Bailey Judge and...
About this blog
“Pink Tape” isn’t just about family law. I post about topics that interest me, which mostly revolve around family law, but also include non-legal family-related topics as well as unrelated subjects. I hope this blog will convince at least one person that not all of us in the legal profession are money-hungry sharks. Some of us are actually quite nice. Additionally, I aim to provide useful information about family law for those working in the field without being too heavy or boring.
The primary goal of the blog is to improve the quality of public information and discussions about legal issues.
I understand that not everyone is a fan of “Pink Tape” or family lawyers in general.
latest
Blog Posts
Children Law Conference
The family practice group at St John's Chambers, are holding a whole day children law conference on 19 November, at We The Curious in Bristol. We've worked really hard to put the programme together and have tried to squeeze in something for everyone. The morning is...
Kirstie gets a telephone call from the social
I had a call earlier. Did I want to do a TV interview about Kirstie Allsopp and child protection? Er...on the Sunday afternoon of the August bank holiday weekend? To be quite honest, no. I've not got my face on and I'm in the middle of prepping for a trial, which...
X marks the spot?
It was the place where we all converged, at the centre of the social media map. But it all seems to be crumbling now. I flirted with mastodon a little while ago. Nobody really had the energy for it and it was dull as ditchwater, with suffocating etiquette to learn. We...
Looked After – A Childhood in Care
It's been a while since I've managed a book review. Because I'm always too absorbed in the job. I bought this book a couple of months ago, having read a review somewhere, and have been carrying it around in my backpack ever since. Unopened, naturally. There is always...
The ramblings of an old woman
The other day I was trawling back through very old Pink Tape posts looking for something I thought I'd written back in 2009. I was struck by how often I was writing on this blog, at at time when I was between babies and back at work. In one month there were about 20...
Resolution Podcast – Joshua Rozenberg, transparency – what’s not to like?
Ok, well it also features yours truly wibbling on about her pet topic again, but I'd like to think this episode of the excellent Resolution Podcast is interesting nonetheless. It was certainly fun to record, and Joshua as SUCH a total pro, reeling off all those on...
Controversial Suspected Inflicted Head Injuries pilot launched: Lawyers raise concern about lack of consultation and potential unfairness
To all care lawyers: There is an important post on The Transparency Project telling you about a new pilot that is running in Head Injury cases in Birmingham Sheffield and Manchester. When I say new, apparently its been live since April, not that anybody has been...
Pay what you owe or talk to the hand (what’s a Hadkinson order when it’s at home?)
The case of BR v SN provides an unusual example of court proactively controlling litigation about child arrangements against a backdrop of pretty relentless litigation, appeals and a failure to comply with orders made. After many earlier stages in the...
The presumption of parental involvement ten years on
‘Now is the time to reassess presumption of parental involvement’, writes Lea Levine in the April issue of the journal[1]. That’s what the Harm report said in 2020[2], and the Government agreed before commissioning an ‘urgent’ review of the legislative provisions in...
Rules of the blog
Anonymized or fictional
All the information on this blog is anonymized or fictional to avoid causing any trouble for anyone, including myself. I have modified details to prevent the identification of specific cases.
Comments
I won’t approve comments that, in my judgment, breach privacy laws related to family matters. Unless individuals have been identified in a published judgment, I won’t disclose their involvement in any proceedings.
Nothing Defamatory
I will not post anything that I believe could be considered defamatory. Due to time constraints, I can’t fact-check every statement in a comment. Therefore, I must be cautious to prevent potential legal issues or threatening letters. If you’re certain that a comment is not defamatory, you can publish it elsewhere at your own risk.
NOT Legal Advice
The content of this blog is not intended to constitute legal advice, so please don’t interpret it as such. It may seem relevant to your situation, but it likely isn’t. I cannot be held responsible for any reliance you place on its contents.
Accuracy
The information on the blog is as accurate and up to date as possible, considering my other commitments. Pink Tape is a hobby that I work on when time allows. Therefore, I can’t cover all legal changes or update information that becomes outdated.
External Links
I cannot be held responsible for the content of external sites linked from this blog, in terms of their accuracy or the opinions expressed on them
Moderation
I’ve implemented comment moderation on this blog to filter out comments that are repeatedly negative or offensive about lawyers. Rest assured, I won’t block sensible contributions, even if they disagree with me. I will strive to moderate promptly, but occasionally a comment may get lost in spam.
Right of Reply
If a post contains an inaccuracy about you and you’d like it corrected, feel free to comment for a right of reply. Please respect that the content on this blog is my intellectual property, and ask for permission before reposting. If you have any topics or blog post suggestions, feel free to email me at familoo@pinktape.co.uk.
Copyright
All material on this site is copyright of Lucy Reed. Please do not reproduce without permission.