header-logo header-logo

Privacy matters

28 February 2008 / Loraine Davenport
Issue: 7310 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Most family cases are of no interest to anyone but the parties involved, says Loraine Davenport

There are stark anomalies in the family courts. In one of my cases my client was the mother in a contact application brought by a father whom she alleged had sexually abused their child. Findings were made against the father, which the father appealed. The case had been through five hearings in the county court. The mother was understandably protective of her child’s anonymity and was shocked to learn that the appeal hearing was open to the public. While reporting restrictions would, of course, prevent the parties being named, my client was concerned that there was potential for the general public to hear the details of her private trauma.

 

ANOMALIES

The press has a right to enter family proceedings courts but not the county courts. The higher courts are open so that when matters of law are appealed they are in open court.

The distinction is that the Family Proceedings Rules 1991

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

Slater Heelis—Chester office

Slater Heelis—Chester office

North West presence strengthened with Chester office launch

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Firm grows commercial disputes expertise with partner promotion

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

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

NEWS
The House of Lords has set up a select committee to examine assisted dying, which will delay the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill
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
back-to-top-scroll