Tag: Anonymity

XW v XH [2018] EWFC 44 A well known businessman, whose products are used by millions globally, was petitioned for divorce by his wife.  Despite there being a public interest in the judgment, it was anonymised and redacted mainly to protect the privacy of the couple’s particularly vulnerable child, who would have been harmed by the […]

NT1 and NT2 and Google LLC [2018] EWHC 799 (QB)  Two businessmen (NT1 and NT2) brought unrelated claims to the High Court about their rights to be forgotten by Google. Both claimants had spent convictions and, having had their requests for the removal of related search results by Google refused, they resorted to legal action. NT1’s […]

This case is the most recent in an increasingly long line of authorities considering the UK’s international obligations to victims of trafficking who are forced to commit crimes integral to their trafficked status. The obligations derive from the Council of European Convention on Action Against Trafficking in Human Beings 2005, and from the EU Directive 2011/36 on Preventing and Combating Trafficking in Human Beings, and are now reflected in the Modern Slavery Act 2015.

In 2009 parties A and B were convicted of offences which caused public outrage. The original case was known as the ‘Eddlington’ case. The case brought before Sir Geoffrey Vos in the High Court was an application for a permanent order restraining the press and all other persons from publishing A and Bs names or identities following their 18th birthdays. There are limited cases of this nature therefore the outcome and the clarification of points relating to human rights and public protection are important.

The anonymity of children has been protected in two recent high profile cases, highlighting the increasing recognition by courts of the impact media has on children’s welfare.

The Judicial College have published their updated Reporting Restrictions in the Criminal Courts. The guidance by the Judicial College, Media Lawyers Association, News Media Association and Society of Editors was published in April 2015 (and revised in May 2016).

On 7th April 2016, Mr Justice Globe of Leeds Crown Court passed sentences on two girls, F and D, convicted of the murder of Angela Wrightson. In his decision, Justice Globe also had to consider whether to grant anonymity to F and D following an application by the media to lift reporting restrictions preventing identification of the girls.

The Supreme Court in R (on the application of C) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Justice (Respondent) [2016] UKSC 2 [2014] considered whether to grant anonymity to a mentally ill man, known as ‘C’.

The Standing Committee for Youth Justice (SCYJ) has launched a new resource for Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) on anonymity for children in trouble with the law, to help ensure the YOTs views are heard in court.

The CPS have updated their Reporting Restrictions Guidance for Children and Young People as Victims, Witnesses and Defendants.

The Judicial College has recently issued a Supplementary Note to Reporting Restrictions in the Criminal Courts April 2015: Children and Young People, 30 July 2015.