Comments on: Barrister in ‘No Duty to Child’ Shock http://pinktape.co.uk/cases/barrister-in-no-duty-to-child-shock/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=barrister-in-no-duty-to-child-shock a blog from the family bar Tue, 22 May 2012 17:04:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Rory Witham http://pinktape.co.uk/cases/barrister-in-no-duty-to-child-shock/#comment-439 Rory Witham Thu, 02 Feb 2012 16:50:09 +0000 http://pinktape.co.uk/?p=453#comment-439 I fully agree with the matters and issues brought in this article. Having seen solicitors withdraw when they had seen enough to disable themselves to represent the client. Such apporaches, should be commended as it them makes the party who is more difficult shall we say stand alone in the middle. [edited - details of specific case removed] As a LiP, it is a hard upward struggle on the basis that the court relies on qualified advice concerning matters. A Bias and strongly aposed advisor will run over the top of the LiP in order to protect their clients interests. This poses the risk of the child's welfare being placed in question. Thankfull I am educated, but Im also disabled and I have experniece with commercial court, so I made a few mistakes, such as quoting law to the judge, and providing evidence in the case that required reading. where by the wrong order of documents without any covering information turned the judge down the wrong path. I was however very luck in that I have been gathering evidence on the case over 10 years and was in a position to manage the case and have orders made at risk to myself. I have on the whole found that public funded cases are substandard in the form of advise and service and when mistakes are made the advisors pull out. Simply due to the fact that they take on too many cases and do not have time to go through the devil details of the more complex cases. This does a disservice to everyone. The points made within your document are accureate and have been seen by myself many times. Children first Everyone else after. 14 months of case and still fighting. I fully agree with the matters and issues brought in this article.
Having seen solicitors withdraw when they had seen enough to disable themselves to represent the client.
Such apporaches, should be commended as it them makes the party who is more difficult shall we say stand alone in the middle.

[edited - details of specific case removed]

As a LiP, it is a hard upward struggle on the basis that the court relies on qualified advice concerning matters.
A Bias and strongly aposed advisor will run over the top of the LiP in order to protect their clients interests. This poses the risk of the child’s welfare being placed in question.
Thankfull I am educated, but Im also disabled and I have experniece with commercial court, so I made a few mistakes, such as quoting law to the judge, and providing evidence in the case that required reading. where by the wrong order of documents without any covering information turned the judge down the wrong path.

I was however very luck in that I have been gathering evidence on the case over 10 years and was in a position to manage the case and have orders made at risk to myself.

I have on the whole found that public funded cases are substandard in the form of advise and service and when mistakes are made the advisors pull out. Simply due to the fact that they take on too many cases and do not have time to go through the devil details of the more complex cases.
This does a disservice to everyone.

The points made within your document are accureate and have been seen by myself many times.
Children first Everyone else after.
14 months of case and still fighting.

]]>