header-logo header-logo

30 November 2012
Issue: 7540 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Family

Re X and Y (children) (executive summary of serious case review: reporting restrictions) [2012] EWCA Civ 1500, [2012] All ER (D) 213 (Nov)

The statutory regime in Wales governing the restriction of publication of material likely to lead to the identification of children following criminal proceedings in which a parent of the children was convicted of a serious offence relating to one of the children’s siblings comprised the Children Act 2004 and the Local Safeguarding Children Boards (Wales) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1705). That regime recognised the need to balance the various Art 8 and Art 10 rights in play, and indicated that the balance was to be struck by publishing an executive summary appropriately anonymised. The statutory scheme was plainly Convention compliant and carefully crafted to accommodate the Strasbourg “balancing exercise”. In each individual case, careful thought would need to be given to the identities of those who required anonymisation, and the degree of anonymisation required. The statutory scheme contemplated, and compliance with the Convention required, that what was published had to be anonymised to such an extent

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll