There is a need to protect children from exploitation by the media. Film makers who sought to persuade vulnerable children to participate in filming could be required to provide undertakings to the court not further to do so.
Sir Stephen Brown P said: ‘In this case it is apparent from the correspondence, in particular the solicitors’ letters, that the film company and Channel 4 are at pains to assert their democratic right to interview and film children provided that they obtain their individual consent. There appears to be a complete lack of understanding on their part of the position of the director of social services who has a responsible statutory duty to protect young people in his area. It appears to me that the problems in this case have principally arisen from the fact that the film company took the deliberate decision not to alert or to inform the social services of their proposed operations. They approached these children without parental consent or knowledge and indeed without the knowledge of anybody whose duty it was to seek to afford a degree of supervisory assistance to the children. Undoubtedly misunderstandings occurred as a result.’
Judges:
Sir Stephen Brown P
Citations:
Times 21-May-1999, Gazette 09-Jun-1999, [1999] 2 FLR 347
Cited by:
Cited – E v Channel Four, News International Ltd and St Helens Borough Council FD 1-Jun-2005
The applicant sought an order restraining publication by the defendants of material, saying she did not have capacity to consent to the publication. She suffered a multiple personality disorder. She did herself however clearly wish the film to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Media, Children, Media
Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84375