The father applied to the court to have the media excluded from the hearing into the residence and contact claims relating to his daughter. Held: It was for the party seeking such an order to justify it. In deciding whether or not to exclude the press in the welfare or privacy interests of a party … Continue reading Child X (Residence and Contact- Rights of Media Attendance) (Rev 2): FD 14 Jul 2009
The finding that a party had been denied a fair trial may of itself be sufficient compensation. The applicant had been excluded from management of licensed casinos. The appeal board had been found to have given the appearance of bias against him. ‘The Court recalls that it is well established that the principle underlying the … Continue reading Kingsley v The United Kingdom (No 2): ECHR 28 May 2002
The applicant sought to have his application for a residence order heard in open court: ‘Article 6 (1) provides for the public hearing and the public pronouncement of judgment of cases, but with the proviso of exclusion of the press and the public from all or part of the trial ‘in the interest of morals, … Continue reading P-B (a Minor) (child cases: hearings in open court): CA 20 Jun 1996
The provisions of rule 4.16(7) providing for confidentiality in children proceedings were Convention compliant: ‘such proceedings are prime examples of cases where the exclusion of the press and public may be justified in order to protect the privacy of the child and parties and to avoid prejudicing the interests of justice. To enable the deciding … Continue reading B v The United Kingdom; P v The United Kingdom: ECHR 2001
The applicant sought a joint residence order, and for a declaration that the rules preventing such hearings being in public breached the requirement for a public hearing. Held: Both FPR 1991 rule 4.16(7) and section 97 are compatible with the fair trial provisions of Article 61) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human … Continue reading P v BW (Children Cases: Hearings in Public): FD 2003
Application was made for approval of a compromise of a claim for damages for personal injury for the child. The court now considered whether an order should be made to protect the identity of the six year old claimant. Held: An order should have been made: ‘the following principles should apply: (i) the hearing should … Continue reading MX v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust and Others: CA 17 Feb 2015
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified. Held: A judge must adopt the same ‘parallel analysis’ leading to the same ‘ultimate balancing test’, as described … Continue reading Norfolk County Council v Webster and others: FD 1 Nov 2006
The court was asked as to how a Family Division judge might decide whether or not to publish an ancillary relief judgment at the conclusion of a trial during which one of the parties conspired to present a perjured case. H and family members had been found to have manufactured documents intended to hide H’s … Continue reading Lykiardopulo v Lykiardopulo: CA 19 Nov 2010
The newspapers sought leave to report proceedings before the Court of Protection in connection with a patient unable to manage his own affairs. The patient retained a possible capacity to work as a professional musician. The family wanted the proceedings held in private. Held: Their appeal against the order allowing access failed. The normal rule … Continue reading A v Independent News and Media Ltd and Others: CA 31 Mar 2010
