header-logo header-logo

28 January 2010 / Sarah Jane Boon , Tanya Roberts
Issue: 7402 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Privacy v publicity

Tanya Roberts & Sarah Jane Boon ask whether the media’s gain will be at the expense of the privacy of the individual?

The Family Proceedings Rules 1991 (rule 10.28) were amended last April such that the media now has the right to attend most family proceedings, subject to the discretion of the court to exclude them in specific circumstances. At present, the media are permitted to publish details of the family court process, but they are prohibited from publishing the details of an individual case.

However, Pt 2 of the Children, Schools and Families Bill now proposes to set out more generous rules as to what the media can publish, having attended family hearings. Stage 1 would come into effect immediately, but stage 2 could only be implemented at least 18 months later, following a review of stage 1 by the Lord Chancellor, the conclusions of which would be laid before Parliament.

Stage 1

Currently, the starting point is that information relating to family proceedings cannot be published. However, there are three

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll