I feel I should mark the milestone of my appointment as King's Counsel on Pink Tape, the blog which has been a sort of companion throughout most of my legal career to date (including that time when The Times wrongly mistook me for Queen's Counsel, a decade too early). The only problem is I'm really not sure what to say, for fear of being a terrible bore, a terrible big head or both. At the moment, I think I'm going to say no more than this: it's an exciting and daunting time. I'm trying to enjoy all the excitement and buzz that it brings, whilst also taking it deadly seriously and (if I'm honest, which is arguably my weakness) slightly bricking it. It's a big honour and a big responsibility. Some people will roll their eyes, others won't really know what it means, and others will be sad because they applied for appointment and didn't get it (been there - it hurts). I sense that anything I say right now is at risk of irritating, upsetting or confusing one or other contingent. And I...

Interesting example of how not to successfully apply for disclosure of information from the family court here, in Thames Valley Police v Ms F & Anor [2023] EWFC 28. A police force sought disclosure of material from family proceedings in the course of investigating threats to kill by one party which had been covertly recorded by some sort of phone hacking app by the other (the mother). The father had a criminal conviction for domestic violence against the mother, and the family court had concluded he was high risk. The police already knew most of this when they applied.   The judgment is a CJ level judgment from HHJ Vincent, so it isn't strictly authority for anything. But it is typically lucid and is very helpful as a case study. What can we take from this case? Applications for disclosure of information should be backed by evidence and a clear explanation of WHAT is needed and WHY (which may well mean the police need to say what they have and to identify documents or categories...

Busy couple of weeks. I've been to Cambridge, Brighton, London, Exeter and Cardiff. Packed and unpacked my suitcase a lot. Snoozed on a lot of trains. Earned a bit of money, spent a lot. Was interviewed for a podcast. Did some legal blogging. Did not finish my book chapters. Cooked Sunday lunch, but on a Saturday. Fell asleep on the sofa. Now for Sunday homework club. But on a Saturday...  

Many, many years ago I wrote a piece for Family Law Week about s91(14) Children Act. It’s still up on the FLW site here (yes, the picture is me in 2011). I have thought about updating it over the years, but until now I have never been sufficiently bored and it has never been sufficiently urgent. After all, whilst there have been various published judgments over the years since (mainly successful appeals against the making of such orders), they all refer back to and fall in line with Re P (A Child) [1999] EWCA Civ 1323, (which is even older than that amusing picture). The title of that 2011 article posed the question: ‘A never ending story?’And so it has proven ultimately to be, because last year (on May 19th to be precise) s91(14) was amended by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. That created new s91A Children Act 1989 which essentially re-crafts when and how the court should consider and exercise its s91(14) jurisdiction. With it came a whole new PD (PD12Q), and a number of other PDs were...