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—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

DAC Beachcroft—Kirstie Pike & Simy Khanna

DAC Beachcroft—Kirstie Pike & Simy Khanna

DAC Beachcroft further builds national Professional Liability practice, hiring two partners in Bristol

NEWS
A child’s views can be taken into account during international child abduction proceedings, the Supreme Court has held
Small and medium-sized law firms have urged regulators to pause plans to exclude owner-managers from compliance officer roles
Lawyers have raised the alarm on employment tribunal delays and backlogs, with some cases facing a three-year wait for a hearing
The controversial assisted dying Bill has drawn to a halt after MPs defeated it by 286 votes to 270
MPs have called for legislation to protect against the human rights risks of artificial intelligence (AI)
back-to-top-scroll