This is the Practice Guidance that shows that I should NOT have been kicked out of Lincolnshire County Court. Why did HHJ Swindells QC do it? Because she CAN!
Do note para 8:
When considering whether to circumscribe the right to assistance or refuse a MF permission to attend the right to a fair trial is engaged. The matter should be considered carefully. The litigant should be given a reasonable opportunity to argue the point. The proposed MF should not be excluded from that hearing and should normally be allowed to help the litigant.
Where proceedings are in closed court, i.e. the hearing is in chambers, is in private, or the proceedings relate to a child, the litigant is required to justify the MF’s presence in court. The presumption in favour of permitting a MF to attend
such hearings, and thereby enable litigants to exercise the right to assistance, is a strong one.
and para 12 v)
12) The following factors should not be taken to justify the court refusing to permit a litigant receiving such assistance:
(v) The proposed MF belongs to an organisation that promotes a particular cause;
Our particular cause is: “voluntary public interest advocacy – assisting litigants in person“…
As predictable, the Pedros ‘lost’ their 2 youngest kids for adoption and the 3 older ones are to be split up between ‘carers’ – in the ‘best interest of the children’.
WATCH THIS SPACE for further developments!