The firm of solicitors making an application for judicial review of the decision of the Board to institute criminal proceedings against them sought anonymity, saying that procedure which might prove them innocent would nevertheless damage their practice.
Held: The overriding principle was for openness of proceedings.
Citations:
[1997] EWHC Admin 593
Links:
Citing:
See also – Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte T, a Firm of Solicitors Admn 25-Jun-1997
Application for judicial review of decision of Legal Aid board – granted. . .
Cited – Regina v London Borough of Camden ex parte Margarita Martin Admn 25-Oct-1996
The court has no power to make a wasted costs order in favour of a party opposing an ex parte application. . .
Cited – Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Castelli QBD 14-Aug-1995
An applicant, who was HIV positive, wished his identity to be concealed.
Held: Some publicity had already occurred A Contempt of Court anonymity order was not to be used to protect a litigant’s privacy. . .
Cited by:
See also – Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte T, a Firm of Solicitors Admn 25-Jun-1997
Application for judicial review of decision of Legal Aid board – granted. . .
Appeal from – Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Kaim Todner (a Firm of Solicitors) CA 10-Jun-1998
Limitation on Making of Anonymity Orders
A firm of solicitors sought an order for anonymity in their proceedings against the LAB, saying that being named would damage their interests irrespective of the outcome.
Held: The legal professions have no special part in the law as a party . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Legal Aid, Legal Professions
Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.137538