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.
para 9:
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!
The Pedro Family: five children snatched by Lincoln County Council - without paper work 
Pingback: Injunctions against Sabine | Questions about Sabine Mcneil and Terrance Ewing
Pingback: CHALLENGES for McKenzie Friends – as Legal Aid is cut and white collar crimes rise | Voluntary Public Interest Advocacy
Pingback: McKENZIE FRIENDS under the looking glass: a report from the Legal Consumer Services Panel | Voluntary Public Interest Advocacy
Pingback: FROM BRUSSELS Pilgrimage to McKenzie Crusade: in defence of justice for future generations | Voluntary Public Interest Advocacy