Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://buratest.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/5181
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPiper, CD-
dc.contributor.authorKaganas, F-
dc.date.accessioned2011-06-02T10:46:44Z-
dc.date.available2011-06-02T10:46:44Z-
dc.date.issued2010-
dc.identifier.citationHunter, R; McGlynn, C; Rackley, E (Eds), Feminist Judgments: From Theory to Practice, 7: 120 - 133, 2010en_US
dc.identifier.isbn1849460531-
dc.identifier.isbn978-1849460538-
dc.identifier.urihttp://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/5181-
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.hartpub.co.uk/books/details.asp?isbn=9781849460538en
dc.descriptionThe full and final version of this article is available in the published book.en_US
dc.description.abstractThis is an judgment in a book of feminist judgments. It is an alternative judgment, written from a feminist perspective, of a leading decision setting out the approach to be adopted in cases of disputed child contact in cases involving allegations of domestic violence. It aims to provide a challenge to the reasoning of the judges in that case and to demonstrate that a different perspective could have led to different reasoning that would have better protected the interests of women and children.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherHart Publishingen_US
dc.subjectContacten_US
dc.subjectDomestic violenceen_US
dc.subjectFeministen_US
dc.subjectJudgmenten_US
dc.titleRe L (A child) (Contact: Domestic violence): Commentary by Christine Piper, Judgement by Felicity Kaganasen_US
dc.typeBook Chapteren_US
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Brunel (Active)-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Brunel (Active)/Brunel Law School-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Brunel Law School-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Research Centres-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Research Centres/ICCYFR-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/School of Health Sciences and Social Care-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/School of Health Sciences and Social Care/ICCYFR-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Brunel (Active)-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Brunel (Active)/Brunel Law School-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Brunel Law School-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Research Centres-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Research Centres/ICCYFR-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/School of Health Sciences and Social Care-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/School of Health Sciences and Social Care/ICCYFR-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Brunel (Active)-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Brunel (Active)/Brunel Law School-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Brunel Law School-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Research Centres-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/Research Centres/ICCYFR-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/School of Health Sciences and Social Care-
pubs.organisational-group/Brunel/School of Health Sciences and Social Care/ICCYFR-
pubs.place-of-publicationOxford-
Appears in Collections:Law
Publications
Dept of Politics, History and Law Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Commentary.pdf64.46 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Judgment.pdf81.57 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.