Re R (Court of Appeal: order against identification)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 December 1998 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
Practice – Children – Protection of identity – Court of Appeal judgments in child cases – General direction prohibiting publication of information which could lead to identification of children concerned.
The father of a child applied to set aside part of an order of the Court of Appeal which, when dismissing his appeal, prohibited the publication of information which could lead to the identification of the child.
Held – Although first instance hearings of child cases were held in chambers to which the public did not have access, appellate proceedings wherever possible were in open court and the judgment made available to the public and profession through normal court reporting procedures. To avoid any adverse consequences which publicity could have for the children concerned in cases taken to the Court of Appeal, a general direction had been given restricting publication of anything that might identify the children. In any case it was open to a party or any other person to apply that the general direction should not apply in any particular case. In the present case the father had not shown any special circumstances which made identification of the child desirable and his application would be dismissed.
ApplicationThe father sought to set aside that part of an order of the Court of Appeal preventing the publication of information which could lead to the identification of the child. The facts are set out in the judgment of Lord Woolf MR.
The father in person.
The respondents did not attend.
LORD WOOLF MR.This is an application by Mr B in relation to proceedings in which he has been involved. He is seeking to set aside part of the order made by Evans LJ and Wilson J on 17 November 1997 when they dismissed his appeal against the making of an order under s 91(14) of the Children Act 1989. The effect of that order is to prevent the father from making further applications in relation to the child concerned without the leave of the court.
The Court of Appeal, and the court below, only make such orders so that the court can protect their procedures from being misused. If there is good reason for an application being made to the court then the court will always grant leave if this is desirable in all the circumstances. Mr B seeks to set aside this order
because it includes a restriction preventing the publication of information which could lead to the identification of a child. He contends that the restriction should be set aside as a nullity, or an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
P v BW
...2 FLR 765, CA. Pretto v Italy (1984) 6 EHRR 182, [1983] ECHR 7984/77, ECt HR. R (Court of Appeal: order against identification), Re[1999] 3 FCR 213, CA. R v Central Independent Television plc[1995] 1 FCR 521, [1994] 3 All ER 641, [1994] Fam 192, [1994] 3 WLR 20, [1994] 2 FLR 151, CA. R v Ch......
-
Clayton v Clayton
...FCR 108, [2004] 3 All ER 875, [2004] Fam 155, [2004] 3 WLR 1178, [2004] 2 FLR 823. R (Court of Appeal: order against identification), Re[1999] 3 FCR 213, [1999] 2 FLR 145, CA. R v Central Independent Television plc[1995] 1 FCR 521, [1994] 3 All ER 641, [1994] Fam 192, [1994] 3 WLR 20, [1994......
-
B v UK (hearing in private)(app no 36337/97)
...sub nom Re R (residence: contact: restricting applications) [1998] 1 FLR 749 b See Re R (Court of Appeal: order against identification) [1999] 3 FCR 213, [1999] 2 FCR 145 c Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, so far as material, is set out at p 104f–104g, post ____________......