<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Custody Minefield &#187; Litigants-in-Person</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thecustodyminefield.com/category/litigants-in-person/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jun 2018 09:26:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.37</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Brexit &#8211; Family Law Perspectives</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/brexit-family-law-perspectives/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/brexit-family-law-perspectives/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2016 10:24:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International Child Abduction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brexit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brussels II]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child abduction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contact enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leave to remove]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[relocation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1465</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My first thoughts on Brexit news today was sympathy for parents whose children have been removed to other European countries following leave to remove decisions. The decision last night will be causing them uncertainty and anxiety. One of the the best EU regulations from a family law perspective  (or bureaucracy that was forced upon us&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/brexit-family-law-perspectives/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The McKenzie Friend Issue</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/the-mckenzie-friend-issue/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/the-mckenzie-friend-issue/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:51:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[McKenzie Friend]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1359</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last weekend I spoke at a charity event on common failings in intractable contact disputes. Inevitably, the question arose about thoughts on the judicial led consultation on McKenzie Friends. What were my thoughts? For those unaware, there is a consultation underway to look at whether McKenzie Friends should be regulated, insured and paid. Dealing with&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/the-mckenzie-friend-issue/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Failings in Intractable Contact Cases Continue</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/failings-in-intractable-contact-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/failings-in-intractable-contact-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Dec 2015 19:01:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CAFCASS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Enforcement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gatekeeping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intractable Contact Dispute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parental Alienation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[failings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intractable disputes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[parental alienation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1178</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When intractable contact dispute cases fail to be resolved there are common reasons, and ones which involve how the cases are managed by the court and professionals involved in proceedings. Some of those cases are salvageable, while for others the long length of proceedings acts as a bar to the court entertaining a different approach.&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/failings-in-intractable-contact-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spotting Bad Advice and Advisers</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/spotting-bad-advice-and-advisers/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/spotting-bad-advice-and-advisers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2015 17:55:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attitude]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bad advice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conduct]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lay advice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigation misconduct]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[malfeasance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[misfeasance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1127</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There have been several published cases in recent weeks where litigants and their advisers faced criticism over litigation misconduct. Several other cases have arisen which show suspect advice had been followed by the litigant. The purpose of this article is not to level criticism, but to help people avoid legal advice and advisers who can&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/spotting-bad-advice-and-advisers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Where have all the parents gone?</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/where-have-all-the-parents-gone/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/where-have-all-the-parents-gone/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2015 19:44:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hmcts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigant-in-person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigants-in-person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mediation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[representation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=1065</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Chief Executive of Her Majesty&#8217;s Courts and Tribunal Service announced this week that litigants-in-person “have not actually increased the court budget or the demands on the court”.  Some have suggested more unrepresented people have not lengthened proceedings as a whole. I thought I&#8217;d have a look at the actual statistics and contemplate what that&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/where-have-all-the-parents-gone/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Important  Judgment &#8211; Re T (A Child) (Suspension of contact) (Section 91(14) CA 1989) [2015] EWCA Civ 719</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/important-judgment-re-t-a-child-suspension-of-contact-section-9114-ca-1989-2015-ewca-civ-719/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/important-judgment-re-t-a-child-suspension-of-contact-section-9114-ca-1989-2015-ewca-civ-719/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:30:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Section 91.14 Orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Suspension of Contact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[case law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[s.91.14]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[section 91.14 orders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[suspension of residence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=891</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An important judgment and essential reading for those who assist litigants-in-person. The case provides learning points on: the making of section 91.14 orders, the issue of suspension of contact, the issue of the treatment of litigants-in-person (and represented parties) in respect of late filing of evidence by professionals and the other party, the issue of&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/important-judgment-re-t-a-child-suspension-of-contact-section-9114-ca-1989-2015-ewca-civ-719/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Law Society Guidance on dealing with Litigants-in-Person and Malpractice</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/law-society-guidance-on-dealing-with-litigants-in-person-and-malpractice/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/law-society-guidance-on-dealing-with-litigants-in-person-and-malpractice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:22:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[barristers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bullying]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[complaints]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counsel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[courtesy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[filing times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guidance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawyers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solicitors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=680</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Law Society has published guidance for solicitors on dealing with litigants-in-person. This, on the whole, is a welcome step forward. We experience and too often hear of three areas where solicitors&#8217; and barristers&#8217; conduct is unacceptable: The late filing of statements and other information; Late delivery and liaison regarding court bundles; Bullying the litigant-in-person&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/law-society-guidance-on-dealing-with-litigants-in-person-and-malpractice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Knowledge gaps among Legal Advisers in the Magistrates Court</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/knowledge-gaps-among-legal-advisers-in-the-magistrates-court/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/knowledge-gaps-among-legal-advisers-in-the-magistrates-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2015 16:10:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[McKenzie Friend]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[confidentiality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal advisers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[magistates court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mckenzie friend]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=468</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Legal Advisers are responsible for giving legal advice to Magistrates in Magistrates&#8217; Courts throughout England and Wales. They are employed by Her Majesty&#8217;s Court and Tribunal Service. They help Magistrates to make decisions and state the legal reasons that underpin the decisions. They may also make judicial decisions to progress a case. In essence, for&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/knowledge-gaps-among-legal-advisers-in-the-magistrates-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lifebelts and Litigants-in-Person</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/lifebelts-and-litigants-in-person/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/lifebelts-and-litigants-in-person/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2015 00:32:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[family law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigant-in-person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigants-in-person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[panorama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[skeleton argument]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[support]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=391</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After a busy week of helping litigants-in-person, there was finally the chance to watch the Panorama programme on how litigants-in-person have been affected by legal aid cuts. What points came from that programme? Nothing surprising to those involved in supporting people through the family court. Ken Clarke and the Government out-of-touch, and light on empathy,&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/lifebelts-and-litigants-in-person/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>BBC Panorama &#8211; Problems for Litigants in Person</title>
		<link>http://thecustodyminefield.com/bbc-panorama-problems-for-litigants-in-person/</link>
		<comments>http://thecustodyminefield.com/bbc-panorama-problems-for-litigants-in-person/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2015 19:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MichaelRobinson]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Litigants-in-Person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cuts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[in-person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal aid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lip]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[panorama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self representation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecustodyminefield.com/?p=381</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you missed the Panorama programme last night, you can still view it here. Is it news? Not really. The problems existed years ago for those who couldn&#8217;t afford a solicitor, and who didn&#8217;t qualify for legal aid. The difference today is simply there are more people affected following further cuts. Unlike the Government, whose&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thecustodyminefield.com/bbc-panorama-problems-for-litigants-in-person/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
