Transparency rules, ok?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

21 May 2009 / Geraldine Morris

Issue: 7370 / Categories: Features , Media , Procedure & practice , Family

printer

mail-detail

Geraldine Morris outlines the recent rule changes arising from granting media access to family courts

Few areas of law are as newsworthy to the media as family proceedings. Following a concerted campaign by pressure groups and various government consultations, the family courts were opened to the media from the 27 April 2009. The media have quickly realised however that that access is subject to stringent rules.

Family proceedings courts

The Family Proceedings Courts (Miscellaneous Amendments) Rules 2009 (SI 2009/858) came into effect from the 27 April 2009 amending the Family Proceedings Courts (Children Act 1989) Rules 1991 (SI 1991/1395) and the Family Proceedings Courts (Child Support Act 1991) Rules 1993 (SI 1993/627).

The amendments concern the attendance of persons, in particular representatives of the media, during proceedings in the family proceedings court relating to children, and the communication of information relating to such proceedings. The new rules insert into the Family Proceedings Courts (Children Act 1989) Rules 1991 a new r 16A, which provides for who may be present during a hearing

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

Transparency rules, ok?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Geraldine Morris outlines the recent rule changes arising from granting media access to family courts

Few areas of law are as newsworthy to the media as family proceedings. Following a concerted campaign by pressure groups and various government consultations, the family courts were opened to the media from the 27 April 2009. The media have quickly realised however that that access is subject to stringent rules.

Family proceedings courts

The Family Proceedings Courts (Miscellaneous Amendments) Rules 2009 (SI 2009/858) came into effect from the 27 April 2009 amending the Family Proceedings Courts (Children Act 1989) Rules 1991 (SI 1991/1395) and the Family Proceedings Courts (Child Support Act 1991) Rules 1993 (SI 1993/627).

The amendments concern the attendance of persons, in particular representatives of the media, during proceedings in the family proceedings court relating to children, and the communication of information relating to such proceedings. The new rules insert into the Family Proceedings Courts (Children Act 1989) Rules 1991 a new r 16A, which provides for who may be present during a hearing

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Sian Langer & Gemma Parker

Clyde & Co—Sian Langer & Gemma Parker

Firm strengthens catastrophic injury capability with partner promotions

DWF—Dean Gormley

DWF—Dean Gormley

Finance and restructuring team offering expands in Manchester with partner hire

Taylor Rose—Vicki Maflin

Taylor Rose—Vicki Maflin

Firm announces appointment of head of remortgage

NEWS

NLJ this week: Employment law’s fine margins

From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act

NLJ this week: Promises broken on non-molestation orders?

Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection

NLJ this week: Assisted dying under the legal microscope

Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961

NLJ this week: Failure to deliver in Getty v Stability AI

The long-awaited Getty Images v Stability AI judgment arrived at the end of last year—but not with the seismic impact many expected. In this week's issue of NLJ, experts from Arnold & Porter dissect a ruling that is ‘historic’ yet tightly confined

NLJ this week: Spotlight on the Supreme Court in 2025

The UK Supreme Court may be deciding fewer cases, but its impact in 2025 was anything but muted. In this week's NLJ, Professor Emeritus Brice Dickson of Queen’s University Belfast reviews a year marked by historically low output, a striking rise in jointly authored judgments, and a continued decline in dissent. High-profile rulings on biological sex under the Equality Act, public access to Dartmoor, and fairness in sexual offence trials ensured the court’s voice carried far beyond the Strand

back-to-top-scroll