header-logo header-logo

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

Under cover

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll