Table Of Content
- Acid Reflux Treatment Specialist
- Family
- High court judge removed from case in part due to his Garrick membership
- To end FGM, the UK must protect girls everywhere, not just in this country
- Charlotte is an award-winning barrister, academic, and campaigner.
- Admit women or we quit, Sting and Stephen Fry tell Garrick
- Rape victims failed by UK criminal courts are being forced to seek justice elsewhere

Dr Charlotte Proudman represented victim of domestic abuse and controlling behaviour who fled Nigeria with her child. The High Court ordered the return of the child to Nigeria subject to various conditions being met. The mother and the child have applied for asylum and their asylum claim is pending in the first-tier tribunal. Dr Proudman represented the wife at an appeal hearing against refusal to set aside financial remedies order on grounds of lack of capacity and no participatory directions/special measures being in force. The High Court heard the appeal because of “a compelling reason” rather than “a real prospect of success”. As a barrister in immigration and asylum law, I often represent vulnerable clients seeking secure immigration status in the UK due to fear of persecution overseas.
Acid Reflux Treatment Specialist
Charlotte is experienced in judicial review cases that overlap with family law including asylum claims, unaccompanied minors, Article 8 ECHR and domestic violence ILR route. With extensive experience in violence against women and girls internationally, Charlotte specialises in cases involving FGM, honour-based violence, trafficking for the purposes of sexual exploitation and religious conversion. Dr Proudman was instructed in a public law children fact-finding hearing in which they represented private foster carers who had fostered a child for several years. The judge found that the parents abandoned the child and the local authority breached its duties under the private fostering regulations.
Powys man to face trial over alleged Dr Charlotte Proudman tweets - Powys County Times
Powys man to face trial over alleged Dr Charlotte Proudman tweets.
Posted: Fri, 28 Jul 2023 07:00:00 GMT [source]
Family

Mother alleged domestic abuse and emotional harm caused by the father to her and the child. Mother had applied for a fact-finding hearing to determine the disputed allegations and ensure a clear factual matrix for the court, professionals and the parties to work from. During cross-examination of the father, he abandoned his allegations of parental alienation [§57] and the judge found that mother had not alienated the child from the father [§78]. In addition, the judge made a number of specific findings in respect of the parent’s conduct and behaviour from para of the judgment. Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the mother in a second appeal in the Court of Appeal where allegations of rape were made in private law proceedings.
High court judge removed from case in part due to his Garrick membership
The Court of Appeal held that care workers could commit a criminal offence if they were to make the practical arrangements for C to visit a prostitute. C was unable to make the arrangements for himself because of mental incapacity. The CWJ submitted evidence on behalf of two women’s charities showing the harm that is caused to girls and women in prostitution. It was submitted that it is impossible to be satisfied that a woman has not been subject to exploitative conditions which could result in criminal liability.
The mother and the child have applied for asylum and their asylum claim is pending in the first-tier tribunal which is due to the heard early this year. Charlotte represents survivors of rape, domestic abuse and controlling behaviour in the family courts whilst also challenging misconceptions across the sector. She uses her knowledge and experience of the justice system to advocate for legal change and protect victims.
Charlotte is an award-winning barrister, academic, and campaigner.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the mother whose children were removed from her care and initially placed into foster care. The mother supported the media’s application to report on the proceedings, as she sought the right to ‘tell her story.’ Read Tortoise media. She is a legal advisor to Our Streets Now and Plan UK, a campaign to criminalise sexual harassment and Ambassador to DAME, sustainable period products. My endeavors have brought about significant legal transformations, furthering the cause of women's rights.
The child had consistently wanted to return to live with her mother. After a successful appeal, the child was separately represented and she achieved an order which allowed her to spend the majority of her time with her mother. On behalf of Kate Griffiths MP, Dr Charlotte Proudman successfully appealed an interim decision made by the family court. The court set aside an interim decision for direct contact between the child and the father (who had raped the mother) on the basis that PD12J had not been fully complied with amongst other matters.
Rape victims failed by UK criminal courts are being forced to seek justice elsewhere
At a further hearing to decide on contact arrangements, there were no participation directions, which meant that the mother could see the father who had raped her. The Judge encouraged the mother to agree contact arrangements directly with the father, her proven rapist. The Judge failed to address PD12J, Part 3A and PD3AA and leading case law. My focus centers on holding perpetrators of male violence against women and girls accountable, a specialization that underlines my commitment to justice and equality. Fearlessly confronting gender bias within the legal system, I have been at the forefront of representing victims of rape, coercive control, and female genital mutilation (FGM). I steadfastly refuse to shy away from confronting the truth, even when speaking it challenges established power structures.
In partnership with the Good Law Project, Charlotte has founded ‘Right to Equality’, a not for profit that campaigns to change the law for women and girls. Dr Proudman represented the mother in a case concerning the admission of sexual images and videos and participation directions for vulnerable witnesses. The mother alleged rape, domestic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour.
I often represent vulnerable girls and women at risk of FGM or other forms of gender-based violence. Dr Charlotte Proudman represented the mother in application for an FGMPO on behalf of her daughter at risk of FGM in Nigeria. The mother applied for expert assessments and the appointment of a children’s guardian. Dr Proudman represented the mother in an application to appeal the fact-finding judgment, which was allowed. The appellate Court held that the trial Judge minimised domestic abuse and failed to apply the law concerning domestic abuse. Tortoise media applied to report on care proceedings, in which the parents are under investigation arising out of a suspected ‘illegal abortion’ under the 1861 Act.
She is accused by the Bar Standards Board of tweeting misleading information that “inaccurately reflected the findings of the judge in a case in which she was instructed”. There is no suggestion that Cohen and Havers discussed this case or any work matters or ever met at the central London club. But it highlights some of the issues around public perception raised by the membership of significant numbers of Britain’s most senior judges of a club that has resisted calls to allow female members since the 1960s. FGM–health, law, education and sustainable goals through upstream and downstream approaches. “Charlotte has excellent knowledge in the area of female genital mutilation law.
The appeal was allowed, and the order for child contact was set aside. Dr Proudman represented a mother opposing a care order and placement order in respect of her three children. The local authority alleged domestic abuse between the mother and her former partners causing the children harm. The court also found that one of the fathers physically assaulted a child, which constituted non-accidental injury. The court made a number of serious findings relating to domestic abuse and neglect in the family home. The court made a care order and a placement order in respect of the three children.
She demonstrates commitment to and passion for this area of work. I have been most impressed by her professionalism and swift response especially with pro bono cases that are often at very short notice. On behalf of the families that Charlotte has supported and is continuing to support, I would like to send her our sincere gratitude”. “Charlotte has excellent knowledge in the area of female genital mutilation law.
The Judge set out the steps the court is required to take in a case where a party or witness is a victim or is at risk of being a victim of domestic abuse (see §23). Dr Proudman represented the respondent mothers in two appeals concerning rape, domestic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour. The court was invited – but declined – to give a consistent definition of rape, sexual abuse and consent in family law proceedings. The mother’s argued that a failure to have a consistent definition is in breach of Article 6, 8 and 14.
Dr Charlotte Proudman represented a victim of domestic abuse who was abused by her ex-partner, a senior social worker. The mother appealed the trial Judge’s refusal to disclose findings of domestic abuse to the father’s regulatory body, Social Work England. The mother was successful in her appeal and the Judge handed down guidance on the court’s approach to addressing applications to disclose court judgments to regulatory bodies. Two journalists made an application to publish the fact-finding judgment of HHJ Williscroft with the parent’s names. This application was supported by Ms Kate Griffiths MP who was represented by Dr Charlotte Proudman. The court highlighted the importance of a victim of rape, domestic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour having the right to ‘tell their story’ and the family court should not be used by perpetrators to silence victims.
The case involved issues of validity of marriages overseas, the necessity of documentary evidence proving the existence of a marriage and the relevance of expert evidence. Dr Proudman represented the parents of a child at risk of FGM abroad. The court gave guidance that an application for an FGMPO should only be made when the family’s immigration appeal rights have been exhausted. Karon Monaghan QC and Dr Proudman represented the mother in an application for a FGMPO on behalf of her daughter before the President of the Family Division. The President ordered that the family court cannot prohibit the Home Secretary from removing a girl at high risk of FGM from this jurisdiction.