Re. X, Y, Z (Morgan v A Local Authority)  EWHC 1157 (Fam) Reporting restrictions
Sourced through Scoop.it from: www.onebrickcourt.com
The President, Wall LJ, did not grant Dr M anonymity and ordered that his report (anonymised to protect the family) may also be published.
The legal principles:
The President approved and adopted the reasoning of Munby J (as he then was) in BBC v CAFCASS Legal  EWHC 616 (Fam) and A v Ward  EWHC 16 (Fam), decisions which also considered the question of what should be permitted to be reported about child care proceedings which had been dismissed (para 29).
As the proceedings concerning X, Y and Z had come to an end, the only statutory reporting restriction which applied was the Administration of Justice Act 1960, s.12. This meant that, unless an order was made under either the restraint or the disclosure jurisdictions, limiting or relaxing the statutory provisions, (see Re B (A Child) (Disclosure)  EWHC 411 (Fam)), Dr M could be publicly identified, but his report could not be published or its contents discussed (paras 29, 32, 70).
See on Scoop.it – Public Law Children Act Adoption Cases
This entry was posted in Family Law
. Bookmark the permalink