Private Hearings are Not in Secret
H sought an order restricting reporting of the divorce financial remedy proceedings, or an anonymity order.
Held: The application was refused save as to identification of the children, and certain tax matters. The hearing was listed as in Private restricted only that certain people only were entitled to attend, and did not mean that the hearing was in secret: ‘status signifies nothing in terms of the reportability of the proceedings, which is governed by s. 12 of the 1960 Act. ‘In private’ in FPR 27.10 does no more than to prescribe a mode of trial. It is a mode which allows certain members of the public in to watch, but not others. ‘
and: ‘anonymisation is a direct derogation from the Art 10 rights of the public at large and must be treated as such. As is commonplace, the submissions suffer by tacitly asking the wrong question: ‘Why is it in the public interest that the parties should be named?’ rather than the right one: ‘Why is it in the public interest that the parties should be anonymous?’ ‘
and ‘to create a scheme providing for standardised anonymisation of financial remedy judgments will require primary legislation’
Judges:
Mr Justice Mostyn
Citations:
[2022] EWFC 52
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 8 10, Administration of Justice Act 1960 12(4)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Gallagher v Gallagher (No 2) (Financial Remedies) FC 13-Jun-2022
. .
Cited – Scott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .
Cited – BT v CU FC 1-Nov-2021
. .
Cited – Xanthopoulos v Rakshina FC 12-Apr-2022
Interim applications . .
Cited – Fields v Fields FD 4-Jun-2015
Wife’s claim for financial remedies after a divorce.
Holman J said: ‘The family courts must be more transparent and there is no good basis for making an exception of financial cases. Such cases are heard in public on appeal to the Court of . .
Cited – Pretto And Others v Italy ECHR 8-Dec-1983
The court considered the value of court proceedings being public: ‘The public character of proceedings before the judicial bodies referred to in Article 6(1) protects litigants against the administration of justice in secret with no public scrutiny; . .
Cited – B v The United Kingdom; P v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Apr-2001
The procedures in English law which provided for privacy for proceedings involving children did not in general infringe the human right to family life, nor the right to a public hearing. Where relatives more distant than immediate parties were . .
Cited – Guardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court CA 3-Apr-2012
The newspaper applied for leave to access documents referred to but not released during the course of extradition proceedings in open court.
Held: The application was to be allowed. Though extradition proceedings were not governed by the Civil . .
Cited – Aylward-Davies v Chesterman and Another FC 4-Feb-2022
Application by AD in Form C63 seeking a declaration of parentage under s55A of the Family Law Act 1986. Specifically she seeks a declaration that Patrick Aylward (now deceased) was her biological father. . .
Cited – Griffiths v Tickle and Others CA 10-Dec-2021
Appeal against a decision of the High Court that a fact-finding judgment in proceedings under the Children Act 1989 should be published with the names of the father and the mother included, and only relatively modest redactions, primarily aimed at . .
Cited – Guardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court CA 3-Apr-2012
The newspaper applied for leave to access documents referred to but not released during the course of extradition proceedings in open court.
Held: The application was to be allowed. Though extradition proceedings were not governed by the Civil . .
Cited – Fields v Fields FD 4-Jun-2015
Wife’s claim for financial remedies after a divorce.
Holman J said: ‘The family courts must be more transparent and there is no good basis for making an exception of financial cases. Such cases are heard in public on appeal to the Court of . .
Cited – A v M FC 5-Nov-2021
Claim by the applicant (‘the wife’) against the respondent (‘the husband’) for financial remedies following divorce. . .
Cited – Cape Intermediate Holdings Ltd v Dring (Asbestos Victims Support Groups Forum UK) SC 29-Jul-2019
The court was asked as to the making public of papers filed by the parties during litigation.
Held: The appeal failed, and the cross-appeal succeeded. the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction under CPR r 5.4C(2) to make the order which it had . .
Cited – Fallows v News Group Newspapers Ltd 2016
Simler J said: ‘The open justice principle is grounded in the public interest, irrespective of any particular public interest the facts of the case give rise to. It is no answer therefore for a party seeking restrictions on publication in an . .
Cited – PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others SC 19-Jul-2017
No anonymity for investigation suspect
The claimant had been investigated on an allegation of historic sexual abuse. He had never been charged, but the investigation had continued with others being convicted in a high profile case. He appealed from refusal of orders restricting . .
Cited – ZAI Corporate Finance Ltd v AIM Disciplinary Committee of The London Stock Exchange Plc and Another CA 30-Aug-2017
The company appealed against a decision to hold disciplinary proceedings against it in private.
Sir James Munby P said: ‘The legal historian may quibble with the assertion that English procedural law in this respect reflects Article 6 – more . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Family, Human Rights, Media
Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.678544
