header-logo header-logo

In the public interest?

08 February 2013 / David Burrows
Issue: 7547 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail
136851159_2

Should vulnerable people who provide information on alleged abuse be entitled to public interest immunity? David Burrows investigates

In Re A (A Child) [2012] UKSC 60 (heard as Re J (A Child: Disclosure) (Rev 1) [2012] EWCA Civ 1204 in the Court of Appeal in September) the Supreme Court was called upon to balance the interests of justice against, or alongside, the welfare of a child. In so doing, the welfare of the child concerned seems to have been connoted entirely with justice (“the interests of that little girl…in having an allegation properly investigated and tested” (para [1])) rather than in the abstract: the public interest in ensuring that those with information about abuse of children come forward (per D v National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children [1978] AC 171). A chance to reassert the public interest immunity established in that case, in slightly different circumstances, not attempted by the Court of Appeal, was not taken by the Supreme Court either.

The court made relatively short work of dismissing

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll