﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/">
  <channel>
    <title>Family</title>
    <description>Family Cases</description>
    <link>http://www.casecheck.co.uk/CaseSummaries/tabid/1184/BlogId/648/language/en-US/Default.aspx</link>
    <language>en-GB</language>
    <webMaster>registration@casecheck.co.uk</webMaster>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:13:58 GMT</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:13:58 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
    <generator>Blog RSS Generator Version 0.0.0.0</generator>
    <item>
      <title>Re W (Children) [2010] UKSC 12</title>
      <description>Appeal from [2010] EWCA Civ 57. In this judgment the Supreme Court reformulates the approach a family court should take when exercising its discretion to decide whether to order a child to give live evidence in family proceedings. In so doing it removes the presumption or starting point of the current test, which is rarely if ever rebutted, that it is only in the exceptional case that a child should be so called.
</description>
      <link>http://www.casecheck.co.uk/CaseSummaries/tabid/1184/EntryID/15978/language/en-US/Default.aspx</link>
      <comments>http://www.casecheck.co.uk/CaseSummaries/tabid/1184/EntryID/15978/language/en-US/Default.aspx#Comments</comments>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.casecheck.co.uk/Default.aspx?tabid=1184&amp;EntryID=15978</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:05:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.casecheck.co.uk/DesktopModules/BlogPlus/Trackback.aspx?id=15978</trackback:ping>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>