header-logo header-logo

Under cover

08 May 2015 / Karen O’Sullivan
Issue: 7651 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
nlj_may_8_osullivan

Karen O’Sullivan examines the level of anonymity afforded to a child or protected party

To what extent is a child or other protected party entitled to an order protecting his or her anonymity? The Court of Appeal considered this question in JX MX v Dartford & Gravesham NHS Trust [2015] EWCA Civ 96, [2015] All ER (D) 180 (Feb) following intervention by the Personal Injury Bar Association and the Press Association.

The infant approval proceedings arose from injuries caused by clinical negligence during the claimant’s birth meaning that she would always require the protection of the court, although at the time of the hearing she was still only six years’ old. The claimant’s litigation friend, her mother, sought anonymity for the claimant, ie an order preventing the press from identifying the claimant. Mr Justice Tugendhat reviewed what he considered to be a “formulaic” witness statement from her which evidenced no special circumstances requiring an anonymity order, that is to say that there was no particular reason to consider that the claimant would be specifically vulnerable

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
back-to-top-scroll