header-logo header-logo

The media and the family courts

06 September 2007 / Eleanor Harris
Issue: 7287 / Categories: Features , Media , Family
printer mail-detail

Government proposals to allow increased media access to family courts provoked consternation, and rightly so, says Eleanor Harris

The issue of public access to, and the reporting of, family proceedings has been the topic of public debate for a number of years. The high-profile criminal trials of Angela Cannings, Sally Clark and Trupti Patel raised general concern, not only about possible miscarriages of justice in the criminal courts but also in the family courts. The particular fear was that where such evidence was heard in private it could be more difficult to challenge the evidence, which could lead to miscarriages of justice.

IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY

This issue was explored by the Department for Constitutional Affairs’ consultation paper Confidence and Confidentiality: Improving Transparency and Privacy in Family Courts in July 2006 (CP 11/06). The paper made the case for greater openness of family courts, arguing that this would result in better understanding of the work undertaken, increase the ability of the public to scrutinise the decisions and lead to a greater confidence

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll