Cooper-Hohn v Hohn [2014] EWHC 2314 (Fam) has created a fuss on issue of media reporting of family cases in England.
Practitioners in open proceeding
(open to public) jurisdictions may be wondering that actually what this fuss is
all about?
As
open justice is an important pillar of
legal system in UK so most of the family law proceedings in this country have long been
recognised as exception to this rule.
There is special category of cases
under family laws that are heard in private. In such cases the disclosure is
provided only under compulsion.
Although representatives of
accredited media are allowed to attend the remedy hearing but the question is, what
they are permitted to report?
Do the media organisations have to ask for permission to
report, related the parties have to apply for an injunction to prevent
reporting?
This was one of main question that
is found by Justice Roberts while determining how parties wealth should be divided,
on 10th day final hearing.
The arguments from counsel for media
and both parties were placed before the court on what the press should be
allowed to publish. Law was found unclear on that.
Although the Family Procedure Rules
2010 does allow accredited members of the media to attend court, but those
rules are silent on what they may report .There is no binding decision about
whether the '1926 Act' applies to financial remedy cases and also un clarity on
law about 'implied undertaking of confidentiality', that whether parties owing
'implied undertaking of confidentiality to each other and to the court should
extend to the press.
Proceedings with presence of press
in it should be considered ‘public’, is the question that is unanswered.
During the preceding the Judge said
that ‘notwithstanding journalists now have rights of access to these private
hearings, here been a need, to protect the confidential nature of the financial
information disclosed within such hearings.
It was a matter of balancing the
couple's rights to privacy (under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human
Rights), against the media's Article 10 rights to freedom of expression on the
other.
The content of this article is
intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice
should be sought about your specific circumstances.
0 comments:
Post a Comment