header-logo header-logo

Stop press

15 May 2015 / Christopher Butler , Harriet Errington
Issue: 7652 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail
nlj_may_15_butler

Christopher Butler & Harriet Errington examine the court’s discretion to exclude media representatives from family proceedings

It is a fundamental principle at the heart of the rule of law in England and Wales that court proceedings should be held in public and decisions reported publicly. Somewhat at odds with this, however, can be the right to respect for family life. Special considerations must apply to family proceedings due to their sensitive nature; hence the Family Procedure Rules 2010 include provisions dealing with media access to the family courts. This article assumes that the family division judge is not sitting in open court. In such circumstances one would need to apply for the case to be heard in private.

Where proceedings are being heard in private, rr 27.10 and 27.11 of the Family Procedure Rules state that accredited media representatives have the right to attend family proceedings but that right is subject to the court’s discretion. Furthermore, even if the court chooses to allow accredited media representatives to attend there are still various limitations

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

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll