header-logo header-logo

03 January 2019 / Alec Samuels
Issue: 7822 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Conflicting rights: a stand-off?

​Alec Samuels reports on secrecy, privacy, confidentiality & anonymity in the courtroom

  • The general rule is that a hearing is to be in public.
  • The requirement for a hearing to be in public does not require the court to make special arrangements for accommodating members of the public.

Publicity is important, but justice even more so. In contemporary times many situations raise conflicts between the human rights of a fair and public hearing (Art 6), the right to privacy and family life (Art 8) and the right of free speech (Art 10).

The leading cases are:

  • Scott v Scott [1913] AC 417, 437–438, [1911-13] All ER Rep 1.
  • R(C) v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] UKSC 2, [2016] 1 WLR 444, paras [14]–[20] and [36], [2017] 1 All ER 513.
  • A v BBC [2014] UKSC 25, [2015] AC 588 [2014] 2 All ER 827.
  • V v T [2014] EWHC 3432 (Ch), [2014] All ER (D) 293 (Oct).
  • Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd v Dechert LLP [2016] EWCA Civ 375,
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
back-to-top-scroll