A woman embroiled in a private family court dispute in Croydon over children with her estranged husband has won a fight after raising concerns about a psychologist appointed to carry out a "global family assessment".

The woman argued that the psychologist was not properly regulated, and should not be involved in the case, and a judge overseeing the litigation has ruled that another expert should be appointed.

But the woman has failed to persuade District Judge Delia Coonan to allow reporters to name the psychologist she raised concern about.

Judge Coonan, who is overseeing the litigation at private hearings in a family court in Croydon, south London, on Monday ruled that the psychologist's name should not be made public.

She rejected an application by a journalist, which was supported by the woman, and ruled that the psychologist should be referred to as expert "X" in media reports of the case.

The journalist, and the woman, had argued that the public had a right to know the name of the psychologist - the psychologist disagreed.

Judge Coonan ruled that the psychologist could not be named.

The judge decided that publication of the name would be a "disproportionate interference" with the psychologist's human right to respect for private and family life.

She also said she was satisfied that naming the psychologist was "unnecessary".

The judge said she had not made any criticism of the psychologist, and said her decision to appoint another expert had been "pragmatic".

She said there was a danger that the psychologist's reputation would be damaged if named.

The psychologist had been appointed, earlier this year, by a different judge to carry out a family assessment.

Judge Coonan subsequently ruled that an assessment should be carried out by another expert - Alice Rogers.

"X had been appointed by order dated March 19, 2021 to undertake a global family assessment," said Judge Coonan in a written ruling.

"X referred to herself in her CV, amongst other things, as a psychologist.

"The mother had done some research about the qualifications of X after (the) appointment by the court and had discovered that (X) was not regulated by either the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) or the British Psychology Society (BSP).

"The mother had in consequence applied to replace X."

Judge Coonan said the woman's estranged husband had not opposed the appointment of the psychologist, and she said she had taken a "pragmatic approach".

"The court concluded for the purposes of that decision that it was indeed better for the parents to have a report from an expert that both parties were happy with and that it helped in terms of establishing their trust in the expert's opinion, if the report was prepared by an expert who was subject to the relevant regulatory body," added Judge Coonan.

"However, this court made no finding as to whether the mother was justified in her lack of confidence in X.

"It made no criticism of X at all."