Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Laura Doherty for the Applicant Edmund Jackson for the First Respondent Paul Caulfield for the Second Respondent Grace Morton for the Third Respondent Eleanor Irons for the Fourth Respondent David Ashman for the Fifth to Seventh Respondents Lewis Sharp for the Eighth Respondent Hearing date: 21 February 2024 ____________________
ii) Should M attend court, protection must be afforded to the judiciary, staff, witnesses, legal representatives and anyone else involved in the case. And in my judgment that protection must extend to all judiciary, staff, court users and other persons present in the court building who have nothing to do with this particular case.
iv) As things stand, unless she is able to attend the court building, M will not be able to participate effectively or at all. That is an unusual state of affairs (in many, perhaps most cases, remote access is workable) but one which requires particular attention to ensure that a manageable solution can be found.
i) M shall attend the building and be met by her legal representative at security, who should have passed through security before meeting M.
ii) M is not to be accompanied by anybody (for example a friend or associate) in the court building except her legal representatives and security.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.