Legal Guidance and Research / Experts / Katherine McQuail

Katherine McQuail

Katherine has practised at Radcliffe Chambers (formerly 11 Old Square) since 1989. Her main practice areas are probate, inheritance and trusts as well as Court of Protection cases and property work. In addition Katherine undertakes professional negligence cases arising from her core areas of work.

Practice Area

Panel

  • Contributing Author

Qualified Year

  • 1989

Experience

  • Barrister (1989 - 2020)

Membership

  • Chancery Bar Association
  • Professional Negligence Bar Association
  • ACTAPS
  • STEP

Qualifications

  • Called to the Bar by Middle Temple (1989)
  • Dip Law (1988)
  • BA (1987)

Education

  • ICSL (1988–1989)
  • City University (1987–1988)
  • Merton College, Oxford University (1984–1987)

1 Contributions by Katherine McQuail

Transparency, Privacy and Reporting Restrictions in the Court of Protection (England and Wales): Current Rules, Practice Directions, Remote/Closed Hearings and Leading Cases
PRACTICE NOTES
Transparency, Privacy and Reporting Restrictions in the Court of Protection (England and Wales): Current Rules, Practice Directions, Remote/Closed Hearings and Leading Cases
Key issues in respect of privacy, confidentiality and publicity in the Court of Protection It is fundamental to the rule of law that justice is not merely delivered but plainly seen to be delivered by all. As a general rule, hearings should be open to the public and the media, save in exceptional circumstances, in order to respect Article 10 ECHR (freedom of expression). At the same time, both the common law and Article 6 ECHR (the right to a fair trial) allow hearings to depart from open court in cases concerning children and other vulnerable people. Until quite recently, the default position in family matters and in the Court of Protection was to sit in private, with only limited scope for reporting. Proceedings before the Court of Protection frequently involve the most intimate, fundamental and private issues, and there is a presumption that the vulnerable person will remain anonymous, so as to give effect to P’s Article 8 rights—and, in some instances, those of P’s family—relating to private and family life. Nevertheless, growing public concern about secrecy in the Court of Protection, together with acknowledgement of the significance of the public understanding how...
Private Client
Expert page AD
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.