View source for RC v CC (2014) EWHC 131 (COP), (2014) MHLO 7

"For the reasons he set out, in a judgment that is detailed and careful, Judge Cardinal concluded that although RC should be permitted to see a redacted version of the clinical psychologist's report she should not be permitted to see any of the three social worker statements. His order included a provision enabling RC's legal representatives to see the three statements 'on the basis that the material contained therein is not divulged to RC without further leave of the court.' ... In the circumstances I am persuaded that the appeal should be allowed to the extent of setting aside those parts of Judge Cardinal's order which relate to the three social worker statements. Counsel were agreed that in this event the matter should be returned to Judge Cardinal to reconsider his decision and judgment in the light of this judgment."

==Related judgments==
[[RC v CC (2014) EWHC 131 (COP), (2014) MHLO 7]]
*[[RC v CC (2013) EWHC 1424 (COP), (2013) MHLO 68]]

==ICLR==
{{ICLR|RC v CC (2014) EWHC 131 (COP), (2014) MHLO 7}}

==Citations==
Bailii has changed the neutral citation to: [2014] EWCOP 131

==External link==
{{#bailii:(2014) EWHC 131 (COP)}}

[http://cases.iclr.co.uk/Subscr/search.aspx?docID=WLRD2014-043 ICLR]

[[Category:Other capacity cases]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2014 cases]]