Why You Should Always Take Notes at a Hearing

Case: Re C (Interim Contact: Procedural Irregularity) [2026] EWHC 1854 (Fam)

If you take one thing away from court hearings as a litigant in person, make it this: write down what happens, especially what the judge says and doesn't say.

A High Court case decided in June 2026 shows exactly why.

What happened

A father appealed a decision made by a District Judge about how often his ex-partner should have supervised contact with their young child. The judge increased contact from once every three months to somewhere between fortnightly and monthly.

Here's the part that mattered on appeal. The judge did not give a judgment. She did not set out her reasons when she announced the order. The written order itself was silent on why the change had been made.

So when the case reached the High Court, everyone had to reconstruct what had actually happened at that hearing from memory and submissions, because there was nothing else to go on.

Why this is where notes become critical

Mr Justice Keehan made a point that applies far beyond this one case: it is not the job of an appeal court to "complete the puzzle" when a judge hasn't explained a decision. Nobody should be filling in gaps after the fact, and that includes reconstructing what was said in the room.

In this case, the mother's side described the judge as saying, during submissions, that she wanted to "test" the mother's commitment to contact before the final hearing, and that she'd commented on how long three months feels for a small child. But this only surfaced afterwards, in a witness statement made after the fact, not from a contemporaneous record made at the time.

If you are the one sitting in that hearing, your own notes are often the only real-time record of:

• what the judge actually said, even in passing, during submissions
• whether the judge gave reasons for a decision, or simply announced it
• what each side argued, and what was and wasn't disputed
• anything said about timing, next steps, or what happens before the next hearing

What to note down

You don't need a perfect transcript. Aim to capture:

• The date, judge's name, and who was present
• What each party asked the court to do
• Anything the judge says that sounds like a reason, even a single sentence
• Whether the judge explicitly gives a judgment, or moves straight to an order without one
• The exact wording of the order as announced, if possible

If the judge doesn't give reasons at all, note that too. The absence of a judgment can be as important as its content, as this case shows.

Why it matters for any later appeal

A decision can be challenged on the basis that the judge failed to explain it, separately from whether the outcome itself was fair. But you can only make that argument with confidence if you have a clear, contemporaneous account of what was, and wasn't, said. Waiting weeks or months and trying to remember, or relying on the other side's account, leaves you at a real disadvantage.

The usual disclaimer

This is general information about a published judgment, not legal advice. Every case turns on its own facts. If you're unsure whether a decision in your case was properly reasoned, or how to raise it, get advice on your specific circumstances from a solicitor, barrister, or a McKenzie Friend.