Make and explore Freedom of Information requests
Offensive? Unsuitable?
Requests for personal information and vexatious requests are not considered valid for FOI purposes (read more).
If you believe this request is not suitable, you can report it for attention by the site administrators
Report this requestAct on what you've learnt
Similar requests
Family Courts(Service) Complaints
To Her Majesty’s Courts and the Tribunals Service by Susan Web (Account suspended) 7 September 2009
Cherie Booth complaint
To Office for Judicial Complaints by Ganesh Sittampalam 19 June 2010
His Hon Judge Polden Conflict of Interest Kent Family Courts
To Office for Judicial Complaints by John Harris (Account suspended) 18 September 2009
UK Supreme Court Complaints Procedure?
To Office for Judicial Complaints by david schiller 16 April 2011
Complaint against a Tribunal Judge
To Office for Judicial Complaints by afham 14 May 2011
Common Purpose graduates, expenditure and invoices
To Office for Judicial Complaints by John Walker 17 March 2009
Confirmation of receiving complaint
To Office for Judicial Complaints by Mr S Rai 4 January 2011
Sir Mark Potter, LJ
To Office for Judicial Complaints by S. Eades 27 February 2011
Designated Family Law Judge for Kent 1st September 2008 His Hon Judge Polden
To Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman by John Harris (Account suspended) 9 October 2009
Conflicts of Interests
Susan Web (Account suspended) made this Freedom of Information request to Office for Judicial Complaints
The request was refused by Office for Judicial Complaints.
From: Susan Web (Account suspended)
18 September 2009
Dear Sir or Madam,
Can you please provide details of how many complaints received
about unlawful practices of Judges and Council SS Legal Team
(children social services) , barrister's etc Cafcass Legal teams
etc , regarding Children taken into ‘care’ by Kent County Council.
Relatives who put themselves forward are considered guilty until
proven innocent, and demands are made that they jump through
assessment hoops, when the House of Lords made it quite clear that
grandparents only have to be good enough parents. The system as it
stands is no better than a 'child trafficking ring.'
It is appalling that in Family Court’s so many children are being
taken into care based on mere opinion of – so-called professionals
and placed for adoption with strangers rather than relatives.
In 2007,local authorities in England applied for 8,173 care orders.
7,624 orders were made. 336 applications were withdrawn, 290 "no
orders" decisions and 21 orders were refused.
In other words, the judgement of the social workers working for the
council was so good, they were only refused by the judge 21 times
(0.27%)
More importantly 93% of the time the judge merely rubber-stamped
the care orders.
House of Lords - Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust.
Baroness Hale of Richmond. Judgement
34. There is, so far as the parties to this case are aware, no
European jurisprudence questioning the principle of freeing for
adoption, or indeed compulsory adoption generally. The United
Kingdom is unusual amongst members of the Council of Europe in
permitting the total severance of family ties without parental
consent. (Professor Triseliotis thought that only Portugal and
perhaps one other European country allowed this.) It is, of course,
the most draconian interference with family life possible.
Although kinship placements are supposed to be the preferred option
in this country, only 1 per cent. of social worker-instigated
placements ended up with kinship carers, compared with 45 per cent.
in Denmark, for example(EVIDENCE given in parliament 16th June 2008
by Tim Loughton MP shadow minister for children)
Yours faithfully,
Susan Web
From: Mulvaney, Max
Office for Judicial Complaints
23 September 2009
Our Ref: 6791/2009
Dear Ms. Web,
Thank you for your e-mail dated 18^th September 2009 in which you make a
request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. This request has been
passed to a colleague to action.
We will provide you with a response by the due date of 21^st October 2009.
If, in the meantime, you require anything further, please do not hesitate
to contact us.
Yours sincerely,
Max Mulvaney - Administrative Team
Office for Judicial Complaints
This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the
addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not
permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.
Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be
intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when
deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.
This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read
at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when
composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.
show quoted sections
Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.
From: Casanova, Steven
Office for Judicial Complaints
12 October 2009
Dear Ms Web,
Please find attached the response your request for information under the
Freedom of Information Act.
Regards
Steven Casanova
Office for Judicial Complaints
10th Floor The Tower
102 Petty France
London SW1H 9AJ
Tel 0203 334 2555
Fax 0203 334 2541
RESTRICTED - This information is intended for the recipient only and
should not be copied to a wider audience without the permission of the
author
This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.
This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.
This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.
show quoted sections
Things to do with this request
- Add an annotation (to help the requester or others)
- Download a zip file of all correspondence