Appeal against order as to media arrangements for fact finding hearing.
McFarlane LJ said: ‘In the present case, Jackson J used the power available to him to move from the default position so as to allow a controlled degree of publicity. This was a matter for the judge’s discretion. It was common ground before this court that that discretion must be exercised by conducting a balancing exercise between the rights to privacy and a private life which are encompassed within ECHR Art 8, on the one hand, and the right to freedom of expression reflected in Art 10. The parties in this appeal each accepted that the exercise of judicial discretion whether to relax, or increase, the default restrictions upon publication of information from CA 1989 proceedings is not one in which paramount consideration must be afforded to the welfare of the child who is the subject of the proceedings. That acceptance was based upon a number of first instance decisions, together with the President’s Guidance on the publication of judgments.’
Judges:
McFarlane, Macur, King LJJ
Citations:
[2016] EWCA Civ 113, [2016] WLR(D) 105, [2016] 4 WLR 39, [2016] 3 FCR 63
Links:
Statutes:
Administration of Justice Act 1960 12
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Re Al M (Children) CA 28-Feb-2020
Publication of Children judgment – wide publicity
F brought wardship proceedings in respect of M and F’s two children, seeking their return to Dubai. F was the Ruler of the Emirate of Dubai. Media companies now sought publication of earlier judgments, and F appealed from an order for their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children, Media
Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.560264