header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 June 2022 / David Burrows
Issue: 7981 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Open justice, privacy & family proceedings in 2022: Pt 2

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
83594
Time to steady the law on privacy & anonymity in family proceedings? David Burrows makes the case
  • The hierarchical system of precedent and stare decisis.
  • The rationes of Mr Justice Mostyn’s previous decisions regarding the privacy position in family cases.
  • The need to take account of all relevant aspects to privacy of the CPR 39 and FPR 2010 as representing a codification of the common law.

A short series of judgments over the past few months have seen Mr Justice Mostyn recant former views on privacy in family proceedings and—especially on anonymity—to alter his previous position as a judge. The most recent of these cases is Xanthopoulos v Rakshina [2022] EWFC 30 (X).

Part 1 of this two-part series asserted that open justice comprises four main elements:

(1) Is the court open for general purposes, as is the case with most criminal and civil proceedings?

(2) What documents can be released to non-parties (eg the press) before a hearing (eg pleadings, skeleton arguments)?

(3) What

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll