Reposted by Jack Sheard
‘I wouldn’t want to do anything else’ - Jack Sheard (@jpsatthebar.bsky.social) reports on the recent #LALYAwards that took place on 3rd July.
💫👏Congratulations to all the finalists & winners!👏💫
Read on here➡️ hi.switchy.io/zAIn
![In reply, the mother, acting in person, submitted a lengthy skeleton argument responding in detail to every paragraph in Mr Spencer's skeleton argument, describing much of it as factually inaccurate or incomplete and misleading. She reiterated many of her complaints and criticisms of the district judge's judgment set out in her "grounds of recusal" document and her original grounds of appeal. The skeleton argument cited a number of authorities. As before, some citations were non-existent cases - for example "Re M (Paternity: Appeal by Mother) [2003] EWHC 2832 (Fam)". Other cases were cited in support of a proposition for which they were not authority. For example, Re B (Children) [2008] UKHL 35, the well-known decision of the House of Lords on the standard of proof in children's cases, was erroneously cited for the proposition that "the father's conscious choice to ignore correspondence that did not assist his position demonstrates wilful evasion and further undermines his credibility". Re W (Children) [2010] UKSC 12, the equally well-known decision on the principles which should guide the exercise of the court's discretion in deciding whether to order a child to attend to give evidence in family proceedings, was cited for the proposition that "findings reached through a procedurally compromised process cannot stand".](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:drwvh7wngwjgf5qv6vhppp5a/bafkreiaxrcrcohhbt4tg5eyu7gchdcgsgwa6t4e4iwhnz6nmtbvnebwgmy)
